Though we are valiant in battle, we are not alone in our conviction. The tyrant is not foolish enough to mistreat his army, and the combination of his favor and the prospect of power is enough to entice the greedy minds of his legion. If we are to emerge victorious, we are to break down their morale and destroy their ability to retaliate.
Main Challenge: Design a card that deprives an opponent of a resource.
Subchallenge 1: Your card doesn't use the word "target". Subchallenge 2: Your card is effective against more than one opponent.
Player deadline: May 18th, 23:59 PM
Judge deadline: May 21st, 23:59 PM
Cards that are only preventative against unconventional or specific strategies, such as Rest in Peace, Riftsweeper, and Ugin's Nexus would not qualify.
Design Appeal (X/3): Do the different player psychographics (Timmy/Johhny/Spike) have a use for the card? Does it create or fit into a deck/archetype? Elegance (X/3): Are the concepts of the card easily understood at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
Development Viability (X/3): How well does the card fit into the color wheel? Does it break or bend the rules of the game? Is it the appropriate rarity? Balance (X/3): Does the card have a power level appropriate for contemporary constructed/limited environments without breaking them? Does it play well in casual and multiplayer formats? Does it create fun play experiences?
Creativity Uniqueness (X/3): Has a card like this ever been printed before? Does it use new mechanics, ideas, or design space? Does it combine old ideas in a new way? Overall, does it feel “fresh”? Flavor (X/3): Does the name seem realistic for a card? Does the flavor text sound professional? Do all the flavor elements synch together to please Vorthos players?
Polish Quality (X/3): Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating. Main Challenge (X/2): Points deducted if the card does not meet the main challenge or only partially meets the main challenge. Sub Challenges (X/2): One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Design Appeal (2/3): Spike likes how brutal this card is, and Timmy likes the big effect. Elegance (3/3): It's easy to understand.
Development Viability (3/3): Balance (0/3): This is absurdly devastating. While it probably has some semblance of being fair if it's being cast, if you use something like Whip of Erebos to abuse the ETB effect, you're wreaking massive havoc on your opponent, and that's just with the whip alone in terms of devotion. Even with the aforementioned combo, you're dealing 6 and making them sacrifice four permanents. Anything higher than that and you leave such a deep impact that your opponent is unlikely to come back. This is just too brutal at any cost, unless you put a restriction on it being reanimated.
Creativity Uniqueness (3/3): It's new. Flavor (2/3): Some flavor text would have been nice.
Polish Quality (1/3): It's "black and red", not "red and black". Also, the correct order for the keywords is "Intimidate, haste" Main Challenge (2/2): Sub Challenges (2/2):
Total: 18/25
Design Appeal (1.5/3): Spike enjoys shredding hands. Timmy is sort of interested in the big effect. Elegance (3/3):
Development Viability (3/3): This feels right. Balance (1/3): You costed this card safely, but you definitely made it on the weaker side. In order for this card to be Hymn to Tourach, you have to spend five mana. The versatility is appreciated, but even still this is too weak. By the time you have enough mana to play this for a significant amount, you might as well cast Wit's End.
Creativity Uniqueness (1/3): It's a more expensive Mind Twist. Flavor (1/3): I'm not loving the flavor text. The card doesn't give me the image of a weapon, and the flavor text feels unenthused. Also, why would a black mage despise bloodshed?
Polish Quality (3/3): Main Challenge (2/2): Sub Challenges (2/2):
Total: 17.5/25
Design Appeal (1/3): This appeals to Johnny. It's too narrow for spike and too small for timmy. Elegance (1/3): Much like "your life total can't change", the rules text is small but the implications are highly confusing for newer players. Some reminder text would have gone a long way.
Development Viability (3/3): This is fine at rare. White is probably the best fit. Balance (1/3): This is a little weak for what it does, especially at WW. Sure, you turn off tap abilities, but there aren't that many to begin with and giving everything vigilance doesn't feel powerful, either. Neither effect is worth a card, and together that doesn't change much.
Creativity Uniqueness (3/3): It's unique. Flavor (1/3): The name barely gets there for me. Some flavor text would have gone a long way.
Polish Quality (3/3): I'd put some reminder text after the second ability, but it's alright as-is. Main Challenge (1/2): This is symmetrical and is narrow in what it does. It passes, but by a slim margin. Sub Challenges (2/2):
Total: 16/25
Design Appeal (2/3): Timmy wants to use this so his big spells can't get countered or discarded. Johnny wants to break the symmetry of this card. Spike hates this card. Elegance (2/3): It's not pretty, but it's not terrible.
Development Viability (3/3): This feels fine. Balance (0/3): For a two colored, five mana enchantment, I expect more than a symmetrical Bottled Cloister. This card is either too marginal and slow for a five mana gold enchantment, or it gets combo'd with something like Flickerwisp to make your opponent's hand exiled permanently. What's even worse is that when you do combo, you can do so when your opponent has no cards in hand. There are no good, fair applications for this card.
Creativity Uniqueness (0.5/3): It's a symmetrical Bottled Cloister. Flavor (2/3): The name is very good, the flavor text is poor.
Polish Quality (2/3): "Beginning of each player's end step" and "beginning of each player's upkeep". Main Challenge (0.5/2): This is symmetrical and only deprives opponents of resources in the way that Defense Grid does. Sub Challenges (2/2):
Total: 14/25
Design Appeal (1/3): Spike likes this, no one else does. Elegance (3/3): It's easy to understand.
Development Viability (1.5/3): Rare seems fine, but I'm pretty sure that this would make more sense as either a blue or a green card; if Root Maze or Frozen Æther are anything to go by, this style of land tapping is somewhat more blue/green. Balance (3/3): It's annoying, but if Leonin Arbiter sets a precedent, a two mana card that only affects lands coming into play after it is fair. The fact that it's a cantrip and an enchantment means that it's more powerful than the Arbiter, but less powerful in the late-game.
Creativity Uniqueness (3/3): The effect is new, but the formatting is remniscient of Ground Seal. Flavor (1.5/3): The name is good, but some flavor text would have been good.
Polish Quality (3/3): Main Challenge (1/2): It's symmetrical, so I can't really give you full points. Sub Challenges (2/2):
Total: 19/25
Design Appeal (1/3): This is a spike card. Johnny will be hard-pressed to win by comboing with this, and Timmy doesn't care. Elegance (3/3): It's clean.
Development Viability (1/3): This isn't powerful or complex. This should be an uncommon at best. Balance (1/3): Again, Akki Blizzard-Herder was a common, and in what is generally referred to as an underpowered set. This would easily be fine at uncommon, but as a rare this is too mediocre.
Creativity Uniqueness (0/3): It's a carbon copy of Akki Blizzard-Herder with two power. Flavor (1.5/3): This feels more like a goblin to me. The name and mechanics work well together.
Polish Quality (3/3): Main Challenge (1/2): This is symmetrical, so it doesn't get full points. Sub Challenges (2/2):
Agent of Ennui4
Artifact Creature - Wizard (R)
If an opponent would add any amount of mana to their mana pool, if that player has no colorless mana in his or her mana pool, he or she adds that amount of colorless mana to his or her mana pool instead. "It all bleeds together. It's all the same. War, peace, love, hate... why bother? Surrender to the inevitable and know the peace of a machine."
3/3
Mental Torture1BB
Sorcery (R)
Multikicker 1B
Each opponent discards a card at random, then discards another card at random for each time Mental Torture was kicked. It's the perfect weapon for those who wish their enemies defeated but despise bloodshed.
(22 Total) - October 2014; December 2014; January 2015; April 2015; June 2015; August 2015; September 2015; November 2015; December 2015(T); January 2016; March 2016(T); April 2016; June 2016; October 2016; December 2016(T); February 2017; April 2017; December 2017; November 2018(T); January 2019; April 2019; June 2019
(8 Total) - May 2015; May 2016; June 2016; August 2016; October 2016; December 2016; October 2017; May 2019
(7 Total) - September 2015; October 2015; January 2016; March 2016; April 2016; July 2016(T); March 2019(T)
World Swallower5RGW
Creature - Beast
First Strike, Haste, Trample
When World Swallower enters the battlefield, destroy all nonbasic lands, then put a number of +1/+1 counters on it equal to the number of lands destroyed this way. To it, a great city is simply an appetizer.
1/1
Communication Disrupter
Artifact (R)
Permanents can't be targeted by spells or abilities their controller controls.
"What!?"
Because constructed decks that are looking to utilize Giant Growth-type cards are fairly rare, I would say it falls under the "prevents niche strategies" section and would therefore not qualify.
Oppressive Darkness3BB
Enchantment (R)
Players may spend nonblack mana only as though it were colorless mana. Oh, so you wanted a fair fight? Now, what's the fun in that?
Code of Conduct3WU
Enchantment (R)
At the end of each player's turn, exile all cards from that player's hand face down.
At the beginning of each player's turn, return all cards that player owns exiled by Code of Conduct to that player's hand, then that player draws a card. Patience has its rewards.
Sorr for the delay, I had a lot of stuff to do for university... is it okay if I still post a card?
Mogis's Hierophant6BR
Creature - Minotaur Shaman (MR)
Haste, intimidate
When Mogis's Hierophant enters the battlefield, each opponent sacrifices X permanents, where X is your devotion to red and to black. (Each R and B in the mana costs of permanents you control counts toward your devotion to red and to black.)
6/3
I think I can make an exception this time, but please be mindful of the deadline in the future.
Judgment is final. The judgment of Jimmy Groove's card has been redone. See its relative spoiler for details.
Check out "The Lion's Lair", the article series where I specifically talk about custom card design with the intent to help you get better at it. The article index is always updated with the latest content.
Note - When I say "#N in MOQX", it means: this is the mistake number N in my "Mark of Quality, part X" article.
Design/development: I mentally divide points equally among subsections, assign them, then add them up.
Challenges: what counts is always the letter of the law.
Quality: half a point deducted for any error in templating, wording, spelling, or grammar, no matter how little they may be; a whole point for particularly serious errors.
No complaints unless I got something objectively wrong.
Travel Decree1W
Enchantment {R}
When Travel Decree enters the battlefield, draw a card.
Nonbasic lands enter the battlefield tapped.
Design (1/3) Appeal - Timmy doesn't care. Johnny might try to use this with something like Amulet of Vigor to make the ability asymmetrical. Spike would also like this to be asymmetrical. (2.5/3) Elegance - I'm not sure new or less experienced players would immediately understand that the last ability affects your own lands too, but except for that everything's fine here.
Development (2/3) Viability - All colors get cantrips and the first ability is a variation of that. It's why Wall of Omens is allowed to have that ability. I'm not sure about the last ability belonging in white, it does play into the "I set the rules" aspect of white, but the only card I found on Gatherer searching for the phrase "lands enter the battlefield tapped" is green (Root Maze). Something makes me also see that ability in red, but I can't quite focus what it is. Maybe the interaction with nonbasic lands, maybe the vague similarity with some form of land destruction, I don't know. Rarity can't ever be lower than rare on a card like this, so that's definitely right. (1/3) Balance - The aforementioned Root Maze hits all lands, not just nonbasic ones, and artifacts too. This doesn't hit artifacts and basic lands, but it replaces itself in your hand. Drawing cards, even if the first ability is not technically card advantage but it's card parity, is one of the most powerful abilities in the game, so I can see this costing one mana more. I also wouldn't want this to cost just one mana thinking about how much it could slow the game down. I don't think I'd play this in my limited deck instead of removal or combat tricks. I don't see a lot of uses for this in constructed either, but if it would get played anywhere, it would be there. The problem with this in casual and multiplayer is exactly this being quite unfun on the other side of the table, and often on your side too. I don't think having to wait a turn to be able to use something that has become often necessary today, like nonbasic lands, is that fun for any player, including yourself. The only kind of player that may find something like this fun is the griefer kind, which I hate and I'm convinced is bad for the game (sorry if you're a griefer and you're reading this, but it's what I think, I have to be honest).
Creativity (3/3) Uniqueness - I thought the last ability was something already done, so I was quite surprised to find out it wasn't. (1.5/3) Flavor - The name is acceptable but certainly not exciting. Some flavor text would have surely fit here, I don't even need to open MSE to check.
Polish (3/3) Quality - All good here. (1.5/2) Main Challenge - This fits the main challenge because it hits all players, so it certainly hits your opponents. Still, I think that a card that only hits your opponent would have fit the main challenge even better. (2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Powderkeg Hauler1R
Creature - Dwarf (Rare)
When Powderkeg Hauler dies, each player sacrifices a land. "Fire in the hole! And that hole! And that hole over there!"
2/1
Design (1.5/3) Appeal - Timmy doesn't care. I'd be quite scared at the thought of Johnny recurring this effect somehow, and he'll surely try. Spike likes that it often translates to unblockable. (3/3) Elegance - I see no problems here.
Development (2/3) Viability - It's back from Kamigawa so a lot of years have passed, but if Akki Blizzard-Herder is a common, this, which is strictly better (and I'm using this term with all awareness, but in this case it's definitely right to use it), just needs to be of a higher rarity. Jumping straight from common to rare is huge, but given R&D's position on land destruction today (which I totally share) I wouldn't be surprised to see this making that jump. The comparison with the Herder also tells us this effect is perfectly at home in red, if there's ever been a doubt about that. (2/3) Balance - I think that the ability will often translate to "CARDNAME can't be blocked", and if you think of it this way it's more than playable in both limited and constructed formats and there aren't that many problems in casual or multiplayer. Also, when you're forced to sacrifice a land because you have to block this or you lose the game, you will probably have plenty of lands so sacrificing one shouldn't be that big of a problem. Still, I wouldn't call any card that can destroy lands a fun one.
Creativity (0/3) Uniqueness - I'm sorry but this is exactly Akki Blizzard-Herder word by word except for power. (2/3) Flavor - Both the name and the flavor text are good. I would see the flavor text fitting better the "stupid Goblin" stereotype, but it's also fine on a Dwarf.
Polish (3/3) Quality - All good here. (1.5/2) Main Challenge - This fits the main challenge because it hits all players, so it certainly hits your opponents. Still, I think that a card that only hits your opponent would have fit the main challenge even better. (2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
World Swallower5RGW
Creature - Beast
First Strike, Haste, Trample
When World Swallower enters the battlefield, destroy all nonbasic lands, then put a number of +1/+1 counters on it equal to the number of lands destroyed this way. To it, a great city is simply an appetizer.
1/1
Design (1/3) Appeal - Timmy likes the list of keywords, but as printed I'm not he'd realize how big this can be, which would excite him even more. I don't think there's a lot of things for Johnny to do with this. This costs too much for Spike to care. (2.5/3) Elegance - This is understandable, but the card concept just reminds me too much of Realm Razer.
Development (1.5/3) Viability - The three keywords represent respectively white, red, and green, while in the triggered ability, red does the land destruction part and both white and green can put +1/+1 counters, so everything's fine as far as the color pie is concerned. Rarity is missing, and I can't judge something that's missing, so I just have to take it into account here in addition to the Quality penality. By the way, I could see this at either rare or mythic. (1/3) Balance - I wouldn't certainly play this in limited, where nonbasic lands aren't commonly found. In constructed the playability of this increases the older the format is, because nonbasic lands are more abundant. The mana cost is a huge blow against this in any tournament constructed formats though. It might see some play in casual and especially multiplayer, where there might be a lot of lands for this to feed on. The more players there are, the more lands this will hit. As I've already said I find it hard to call any card that destroys lands fun, but at least when this destroys a bunch of lands, the game will be over soon.
Creativity (2.5/3) Uniqueness - I've already mentioned this playing in a similar space as Realm Razer, but the cards are still different enough for this to feel distinct. (3/3) Flavor - The name and the flavor text are quite good, and they both make a lot of sense on a card like this.
Polish (1/3) Quality - In the list of keywords, the words "Strike", "Haste", and "Trample" should all NOT be capitalized (#11 in MOQ1, one whole point deducted as the error is repeated three times, which is a lot and definitely too many). Rarity is missing, as already mentioned (one whole point deducted again, because rarity is a fundamental part of a Magic card). (1.5/2) Main Challenge - This fits the main challenge because it hits all players, so it certainly hits your opponents. Still, I think that a card that only hits your opponent would have fit the main challenge even better. (2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Agent of Ennui4
Artifact Creature - Wizard (R)
If an opponent would add any amount of mana to their mana pool, if that player has no colorless mana in his or her mana pool, he or she adds that amount of colorless mana to his or her mana pool instead. "It all bleeds together. It's all the same. War, peace, love, hate... why bother? Surrender to the inevitable and know the peace of a machine."
3/3
Please note: this judgment has been almost completely redone from its first version because I completely misunderstood how this card works. This card only makes the first mana an opponent adds to his or her mana pool colorless, not ALL mana he or she adds, as I understood at first. Thanks to admirableadmiral for making me notice this.
As a result of this, both some scores and a lot of critiques have been added or modified. Scores that changed are underlined. Striked parts refer to the original judgment and aren't valid anymore. Parts of critiques that have been added or modified are red.
Design (1/3) Appeal - Griefer Timmies would be interested in the version of this card as I understood at first, but it's for the best that not even them are interested in what the card actually does. I don't think Johnny would be that interested. Some Spikes will appreciate cutting off the opponent from the game with this, except they won't. Let's say they would like to, but it's definitely better that Spike doesn't get to do that as I understood at first. (0/3) Elegance - This is almost the opposite of elegance. The effect is very hard to understand immediately and requires being read multiple times, especially because the way it is worded is quite convoluted. As for the card making sense as a whole, that's mostly just because the flavor text does huge work there. This all still holds true, but I just have to add that if the wording is so complex that a ten-year-long player as myself misunderstands it, something must be really wrong in this area.
Development (2/3) Viability - I don't know which color could have an ability like this. Maybe green, because of its interaction with lands and mana, or blue, because it has color word changing effects. Anyway, as it's not that well defined, I can see it being on a colorless card. Rarity is the least it can be, I'd like to see this bumped up to mythic for its complexity and uniqueness. Complexity because an experienced player misunderstanding this card definitely means that its complexity level is certainly more than enough to be bumped up to the maximum of rarity. Uniqueness because no card ever did something like this (I can't remember a single existing card that cares or does something with only the first mana a player adds to his or her mana pool), and it's certainly splashy enough of an effect to deserve being mythic. (2/3) Balance - Ok, my misunderstanding completely changes my judgment here. I'm very glad I misunderstood the card, because the card how I understood it was pretty obnoxious and irritating to play against. Changing only the first mana an opponent adds to his or her mana pool is much more reasonable, and has a lot less unfun side effects. What it does in practice is turning one-drops into two-drops, because you have to add a colorless mana you won't use to be able to get the one colored mana you need, or making cards with no generic mana in their mana costs even harder to cast then they already are. Neither of these effects are as bad as I feared, and the replacement effect will actually apply much less often than I thought. That's a good thing, and it's definitely enough to make the mana cost you propose acceptable. This is playable in limited, but more for its stats than its effect. I don't see this getting played in constructed. I see no particular problems in casual and multiplayer. Only being able to make the first mana colorless helps a lot there, and it also makes the card much more fun to play, even if I don't consider cards that deprive opponents of resources that fun from the other side of the table. At least this only does partially, as once you have a single colorless mana in your mana pool, you're good to go.
Creativity (3/3) Uniqueness - Well, I can't certainly remember something like this before. (2/3) Flavor - The name may be fine, but I had to google "Ennui" to know what is means, and that's not that good. The flavor text is very good and explains very nicely both this card being colorless and its mechanics.
Polish (2.5/3) Quality - This is not a triggered ability, so having an intervening if is at least bad looking and at worst wrong. I'd suggest either putting an "and" in the place of the first comma, or rewording the first condition to "…any amount of colored mana…" (You can't do this because it would be a functional change, but you still can and should word this with the "and") and getting rid of the fake intervening if (I'd choose this second option, half a point deducted anyway). (2/2) Main Challenge - Finally a card that only hurts your opponents and not also yourself. This fits perfectly the main challenge. (2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Mogis's Hierophant6BR
Creature - Minotaur Shaman (MR)
Haste, intimidate
When Mogis's Hierophant enters the battlefield, each opponent sacrifices X permanents, where X is your devotion to red and to black. (Each R and B in the mana costs of permanents you control counts toward your devotion to red and to black.)
6/3
Design (1.5/3) Appeal - Timmy likes this: big, powerful and heavily afffects the battlefield. Johnny doesn't care. Spike likes making opponents sacrifice permanents, but not at cmc 8. (3/3) Elegance - I see no problems here.
Development (3/3) Viability - Haste is primary red and secondary black, intimidate the reverse, and while making opponents sacrifice permanents feels more black than red to me, there are enough precedents in red to say this is ok. Given the huge effect this has on the battlefield, I'd say putting this at mythic looks like the right choice. I wouldn't want to see too many of these floating around in limited. (1/3) Balance - This surely deserves costing eight mana, as it can very easily be a one-sided Wrath that also leaves behind a 6/3 and with haste and intimidate on top of that. At least, two permanents will be sacrificed, and that's already enough to make this card very powerful. There may be an hidden drawback though: do you really need an eight-mana finisher in a black/red deck? I'd almost say that if you need this in your black/red deck, you must be doing something wrong. Such a deck wants the game to be already closed on turn eight, and if you don't close it by then, you're losing anyway. Yes, this may help turn some of those losses into wins, but at the cost of slowing your deck, which may cost you more losses in the early game. To me, this feels like a wonderful finisher but in the wrong colors. I don't think black/red is the ideal place for such a card. If you drop haste, blue/black would probably love it. This is a limited bomb, but the mana cost hurts a lot its constructed playability. The only problem I can see in casual and multiplayer formats is that making the opponent sacrifice anything is never fun from the other side of the table.
Creativity (3/3) Uniqueness - I can't remember devotion being used like this in Theros block. (1.5/3) Flavor - Name is fine. No flavor text to be judged.
Polish (2/3) Quality - As Mogis himself shows, it's worded "devotion to black and red" (half a point deducted twice, so one whole point, because this error is repeated twice on the card). (2/2) Main Challenge - This deprives opponents of permanents, which definitely are a resource, and does not affect you too, so everything is fine here. (2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Mental Torture1BB
Sorcery (R)
Multikicker 1B
Each opponent discards a card at random, then discards another card at random for each time Mental Torture was kicked. It's the perfect weapon for those who wish their enemies defeated but despise bloodshed.
Design (1.5/3) Appeal - Timmy doesn't care. Johnny might use this as a last resort to protect his combo. Spike loves scalable discard like this, and he also likes that it's random, so the opponent won't just discard his weakest card. (3/3) Elegance - I see no problems here.
Development (2.5/3) Viability - Black has all forms of discard, so random discard too, but this actually feels a black/red card to me. I'd see it costed at 1BR with a hybrid multikicker cost of 1(B/R), but as I said there's nothing wrong with this card as is from a color pie point of view. That's just how to make an already acceptable thing even better, at least in my opinion. I can't see something like this being anything less than a rare. (2/3) Balance - Mind Rot has never been known to be a widely playable card, but it's a good reference point to start. This has a slightly higher cost, because of the double colored mana in the mana cost, and makes the opponent discard only one card, but he doesn't get to choose which one. That feels balanced to me. Making additional discards cost one mana less feels acceptable too, in the end it'll cost you five mana to make the opponent discard two cards and seven mana to make him or her discard three. At seven mana you expect a card to be game changing. This is playable in limited if you have room for a non-removal, non-combat-trick in your deck. I'd say this is more playable than Mind Rot in constructed, not that it's an high bar. The only problem I see in casual and multiplayer is that discarding a bunch of cards at random isn't certainly fun for the opponent, but in the end, again, you're paying a bunch of mana to do it, so something game changing is to be expected.
Creativity (2/3) Uniqueness - I don't remember a discard spell with multikicker (I may be wrong though), and the discard being random adds a nice twist on a classic effect. (3/3) Flavor - The name is very good for a card like this. It reflects the mechanics very nicely. I see nothing particularly wrong with the flavor text.
Polish (3/3) Quality - All good here. (2/2) Main Challenge - Cards in hand are definitely a resource and this only affects your opponents, so it fits the main challenge perfectly. (2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
MCC - Winner (6): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019 || Host (15): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here) || Judge (34): every month from Nov 2014 to Nov 2016 except Oct 2015, every month from Feb to Jul 2017 except Apr 2017, then Oct 2017, May Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here) CCL - Winner (3): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last one here) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016 DCC - Winner (1): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar) || Host (3): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016
• The two public custom sets I've been part a part of the design team for: "Brotherhood of Ormos" - Blog post with all info - set thread - design skeleton / card list || "Extinctia: Homo Evanuit" - Blog post with all info - set thread - card list spreadsheet
• "The Lion's Lair", my article series about MTG and custom card design in particular. Latest article here. Here is the article index.Rather outdated by now, and based on the old MCC rubric, but I'm leaving this here for anybody that might be interested anyway.
• My only public attempt at being a writer: the story of my Leonin custom planeswalker Jeff Lionheart. (I have a very big one that I'm working on right now but that's private for now, and I don't know if I will ever actually publish it, and I also have ideas for multiple future ones, including one where I'm going to reprise Jeff.)
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Though we are valiant in battle, we are not alone in our conviction. The tyrant is not foolish enough to mistreat his army, and the combination of his favor and the prospect of power is enough to entice the greedy minds of his legion. If we are to emerge victorious, we are to break down their morale and destroy their ability to retaliate.
Main Challenge: Design a card that deprives an opponent of a resource.
Subchallenge 1: Your card doesn't use the word "target".
Subchallenge 2: Your card is effective against more than one opponent.
Player deadline: May 18th, 23:59 PM
Judge deadline: May 21st, 23:59 PM
Cards that are only preventative against unconventional or specific strategies, such as Rest in Peace, Riftsweeper, and Ugin's Nexus would not qualify.
Cards that punish, but don't prevent, using resources, such as Zo-Zu the Punisher, Pyrostatic Pillar, and Mesmeric Orb would not qualify
Appeal (X/3): Do the different player psychographics (Timmy/Johhny/Spike) have a use for the card? Does it create or fit into a deck/archetype?
Elegance (X/3): Are the concepts of the card easily understood at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
Development
Viability (X/3): How well does the card fit into the color wheel? Does it break or bend the rules of the game? Is it the appropriate rarity?
Balance (X/3): Does the card have a power level appropriate for contemporary constructed/limited environments without breaking them? Does it play well in casual and multiplayer formats? Does it create fun play experiences?
Creativity
Uniqueness (X/3): Has a card like this ever been printed before? Does it use new mechanics, ideas, or design space? Does it combine old ideas in a new way? Overall, does it feel “fresh”?
Flavor (X/3): Does the name seem realistic for a card? Does the flavor text sound professional? Do all the flavor elements synch together to please Vorthos players?
Polish
Quality (X/3): Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
Main Challenge (X/2): Points deducted if the card does not meet the main challenge or only partially meets the main challenge.
Sub Challenges (X/2): One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Total: X/25
admirableadmiral
thenoodler / Moss_Elemental
Flatline / coletrain
FortiutousEntity
thenoodler / Moss_Elemental
RaikouRider / SelesnyaNewLife
Bravelion83
RaikouRider / SelesnyaNewLife
sperlman / Jimmy Groove
Tilwin
sperlman / Jimmy Groove
Flatline / coletrain
Appeal (2/3): Spike likes how brutal this card is, and Timmy likes the big effect.
Elegance (3/3): It's easy to understand.
Development
Viability (3/3):
Balance (0/3): This is absurdly devastating. While it probably has some semblance of being fair if it's being cast, if you use something like Whip of Erebos to abuse the ETB effect, you're wreaking massive havoc on your opponent, and that's just with the whip alone in terms of devotion. Even with the aforementioned combo, you're dealing 6 and making them sacrifice four permanents. Anything higher than that and you leave such a deep impact that your opponent is unlikely to come back. This is just too brutal at any cost, unless you put a restriction on it being reanimated.
Creativity
Uniqueness (3/3): It's new.
Flavor (2/3): Some flavor text would have been nice.
Polish
Quality (1/3): It's "black and red", not "red and black". Also, the correct order for the keywords is "Intimidate, haste"
Main Challenge (2/2):
Sub Challenges (2/2):
Total: 18/25
Appeal (1.5/3): Spike enjoys shredding hands. Timmy is sort of interested in the big effect.
Elegance (3/3):
Development
Viability (3/3): This feels right.
Balance (1/3): You costed this card safely, but you definitely made it on the weaker side. In order for this card to be Hymn to Tourach, you have to spend five mana. The versatility is appreciated, but even still this is too weak. By the time you have enough mana to play this for a significant amount, you might as well cast Wit's End.
Creativity
Uniqueness (1/3): It's a more expensive Mind Twist.
Flavor (1/3): I'm not loving the flavor text. The card doesn't give me the image of a weapon, and the flavor text feels unenthused. Also, why would a black mage despise bloodshed?
Polish
Quality (3/3):
Main Challenge (2/2):
Sub Challenges (2/2):
Total: 17.5/25
Appeal (1/3): This appeals to Johnny. It's too narrow for spike and too small for timmy.
Elegance (1/3): Much like "your life total can't change", the rules text is small but the implications are highly confusing for newer players. Some reminder text would have gone a long way.
Development
Viability (3/3): This is fine at rare. White is probably the best fit.
Balance (1/3): This is a little weak for what it does, especially at WW. Sure, you turn off tap abilities, but there aren't that many to begin with and giving everything vigilance doesn't feel powerful, either. Neither effect is worth a card, and together that doesn't change much.
Creativity
Uniqueness (3/3): It's unique.
Flavor (1/3): The name barely gets there for me. Some flavor text would have gone a long way.
Polish
Quality (3/3): I'd put some reminder text after the second ability, but it's alright as-is.
Main Challenge (1/2): This is symmetrical and is narrow in what it does. It passes, but by a slim margin.
Sub Challenges (2/2):
Total: 16/25
Appeal (2/3): Timmy wants to use this so his big spells can't get countered or discarded. Johnny wants to break the symmetry of this card. Spike hates this card.
Elegance (2/3): It's not pretty, but it's not terrible.
Development
Viability (3/3): This feels fine.
Balance (0/3): For a two colored, five mana enchantment, I expect more than a symmetrical Bottled Cloister. This card is either too marginal and slow for a five mana gold enchantment, or it gets combo'd with something like Flickerwisp to make your opponent's hand exiled permanently. What's even worse is that when you do combo, you can do so when your opponent has no cards in hand. There are no good, fair applications for this card.
Creativity
Uniqueness (0.5/3): It's a symmetrical Bottled Cloister.
Flavor (2/3): The name is very good, the flavor text is poor.
Polish
Quality (2/3): "Beginning of each player's end step" and "beginning of each player's upkeep".
Main Challenge (0.5/2): This is symmetrical and only deprives opponents of resources in the way that Defense Grid does.
Sub Challenges (2/2):
Total: 14/25
Appeal (1/3): Spike likes this, no one else does.
Elegance (3/3): It's easy to understand.
Development
Viability (1.5/3): Rare seems fine, but I'm pretty sure that this would make more sense as either a blue or a green card; if Root Maze or Frozen Æther are anything to go by, this style of land tapping is somewhat more blue/green.
Balance (3/3): It's annoying, but if Leonin Arbiter sets a precedent, a two mana card that only affects lands coming into play after it is fair. The fact that it's a cantrip and an enchantment means that it's more powerful than the Arbiter, but less powerful in the late-game.
Creativity
Uniqueness (3/3): The effect is new, but the formatting is remniscient of Ground Seal.
Flavor (1.5/3): The name is good, but some flavor text would have been good.
Polish
Quality (3/3):
Main Challenge (1/2): It's symmetrical, so I can't really give you full points.
Sub Challenges (2/2):
Total: 19/25
Appeal (1/3): This is a spike card. Johnny will be hard-pressed to win by comboing with this, and Timmy doesn't care.
Elegance (3/3): It's clean.
Development
Viability (1/3): This isn't powerful or complex. This should be an uncommon at best.
Balance (1/3): Again, Akki Blizzard-Herder was a common, and in what is generally referred to as an underpowered set. This would easily be fine at uncommon, but as a rare this is too mediocre.
Creativity
Uniqueness (0/3): It's a carbon copy of Akki Blizzard-Herder with two power.
Flavor (1.5/3): This feels more like a goblin to me. The name and mechanics work well together.
Polish
Quality (3/3):
Main Challenge (1/2): This is symmetrical, so it doesn't get full points.
Sub Challenges (2/2):
Total: 13.5/25
Artifact Creature - Wizard (R)
If an opponent would add any amount of mana to their mana pool, if that player has no colorless mana in his or her mana pool, he or she adds that amount of colorless mana to his or her mana pool instead.
"It all bleeds together. It's all the same. War, peace, love, hate... why bother? Surrender to the inevitable and know the peace of a machine."
3/3
Sorcery (R)
Multikicker 1B
Each opponent discards a card at random, then discards another card at random for each time Mental Torture was kicked.
It's the perfect weapon for those who wish their enemies defeated but despise bloodshed.
Insomnia
Enchantment (R)
All creatures have vigilance.
Creatures can't be tapped.
"I never sleep, 'cause sleep is the cousin of death."
-Nas, Bard of Brooktown
Creature - Beast
First Strike, Haste, Trample
When World Swallower enters the battlefield, destroy all nonbasic lands, then put a number of +1/+1 counters on it equal to the number of lands destroyed this way.
To it, a great city is simply an appetizer.
1/1
Because constructed decks that are looking to utilize Giant Growth-type cards are fairly rare, I would say it falls under the "prevents niche strategies" section and would therefore not qualify.
This would qualify.
Enchantment (R)
At the end of each player's turn, exile all cards from that player's hand face down.
At the beginning of each player's turn, return all cards that player owns exiled by Code of Conduct to that player's hand, then that player draws a card.
Patience has its rewards.
Enchantment {R}
When Travel Decree enters the battlefield, draw a card.
Nonbasic lands enter the battlefield tapped.
Emille, Seven-Sting Dancer Shalin Nariya
I think I can make an exception this time, but please be mindful of the deadline in the future.
Check out "The Lion's Lair", the article series where I specifically talk about custom card design with the intent to help you get better at it. The article index is always updated with the latest content.
Note - When I say "#N in MOQX", it means: this is the mistake number N in my "Mark of Quality, part X" article.
Design/development: I mentally divide points equally among subsections, assign them, then add them up.
Challenges: what counts is always the letter of the law.
Quality: half a point deducted for any error in templating, wording, spelling, or grammar, no matter how little they may be; a whole point for particularly serious errors.
No complaints unless I got something objectively wrong.
RaikouRider
Design
(1/3) Appeal - Timmy doesn't care. Johnny might try to use this with something like Amulet of Vigor to make the ability asymmetrical. Spike would also like this to be asymmetrical.
(2.5/3) Elegance - I'm not sure new or less experienced players would immediately understand that the last ability affects your own lands too, but except for that everything's fine here.
Development
(2/3) Viability - All colors get cantrips and the first ability is a variation of that. It's why Wall of Omens is allowed to have that ability. I'm not sure about the last ability belonging in white, it does play into the "I set the rules" aspect of white, but the only card I found on Gatherer searching for the phrase "lands enter the battlefield tapped" is green (Root Maze). Something makes me also see that ability in red, but I can't quite focus what it is. Maybe the interaction with nonbasic lands, maybe the vague similarity with some form of land destruction, I don't know. Rarity can't ever be lower than rare on a card like this, so that's definitely right.
(1/3) Balance - The aforementioned Root Maze hits all lands, not just nonbasic ones, and artifacts too. This doesn't hit artifacts and basic lands, but it replaces itself in your hand. Drawing cards, even if the first ability is not technically card advantage but it's card parity, is one of the most powerful abilities in the game, so I can see this costing one mana more. I also wouldn't want this to cost just one mana thinking about how much it could slow the game down. I don't think I'd play this in my limited deck instead of removal or combat tricks. I don't see a lot of uses for this in constructed either, but if it would get played anywhere, it would be there. The problem with this in casual and multiplayer is exactly this being quite unfun on the other side of the table, and often on your side too. I don't think having to wait a turn to be able to use something that has become often necessary today, like nonbasic lands, is that fun for any player, including yourself. The only kind of player that may find something like this fun is the griefer kind, which I hate and I'm convinced is bad for the game (sorry if you're a griefer and you're reading this, but it's what I think, I have to be honest).
Creativity
(3/3) Uniqueness - I thought the last ability was something already done, so I was quite surprised to find out it wasn't.
(1.5/3) Flavor - The name is acceptable but certainly not exciting. Some flavor text would have surely fit here, I don't even need to open MSE to check.
Polish
(3/3) Quality - All good here.
(1.5/2) Main Challenge - This fits the main challenge because it hits all players, so it certainly hits your opponents. Still, I think that a card that only hits your opponent would have fit the main challenge even better.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 17.5/25
Design
(1.5/3) Appeal - Timmy doesn't care. I'd be quite scared at the thought of Johnny recurring this effect somehow, and he'll surely try. Spike likes that it often translates to unblockable.
(3/3) Elegance - I see no problems here.
Development
(2/3) Viability - It's back from Kamigawa so a lot of years have passed, but if Akki Blizzard-Herder is a common, this, which is strictly better (and I'm using this term with all awareness, but in this case it's definitely right to use it), just needs to be of a higher rarity. Jumping straight from common to rare is huge, but given R&D's position on land destruction today (which I totally share) I wouldn't be surprised to see this making that jump. The comparison with the Herder also tells us this effect is perfectly at home in red, if there's ever been a doubt about that.
(2/3) Balance - I think that the ability will often translate to "CARDNAME can't be blocked", and if you think of it this way it's more than playable in both limited and constructed formats and there aren't that many problems in casual or multiplayer. Also, when you're forced to sacrifice a land because you have to block this or you lose the game, you will probably have plenty of lands so sacrificing one shouldn't be that big of a problem. Still, I wouldn't call any card that can destroy lands a fun one.
Creativity
(0/3) Uniqueness - I'm sorry but this is exactly Akki Blizzard-Herder word by word except for power.
(2/3) Flavor - Both the name and the flavor text are good. I would see the flavor text fitting better the "stupid Goblin" stereotype, but it's also fine on a Dwarf.
Polish
(3/3) Quality - All good here.
(1.5/2) Main Challenge - This fits the main challenge because it hits all players, so it certainly hits your opponents. Still, I think that a card that only hits your opponent would have fit the main challenge even better.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 17/25
sperlman
Design
(1/3) Appeal - Timmy likes the list of keywords, but as printed I'm not he'd realize how big this can be, which would excite him even more. I don't think there's a lot of things for Johnny to do with this. This costs too much for Spike to care.
(2.5/3) Elegance - This is understandable, but the card concept just reminds me too much of Realm Razer.
Development
(1.5/3) Viability - The three keywords represent respectively white, red, and green, while in the triggered ability, red does the land destruction part and both white and green can put +1/+1 counters, so everything's fine as far as the color pie is concerned. Rarity is missing, and I can't judge something that's missing, so I just have to take it into account here in addition to the Quality penality. By the way, I could see this at either rare or mythic.
(1/3) Balance - I wouldn't certainly play this in limited, where nonbasic lands aren't commonly found. In constructed the playability of this increases the older the format is, because nonbasic lands are more abundant. The mana cost is a huge blow against this in any tournament constructed formats though. It might see some play in casual and especially multiplayer, where there might be a lot of lands for this to feed on. The more players there are, the more lands this will hit. As I've already said I find it hard to call any card that destroys lands fun, but at least when this destroys a bunch of lands, the game will be over soon.
Creativity
(2.5/3) Uniqueness - I've already mentioned this playing in a similar space as Realm Razer, but the cards are still different enough for this to feel distinct.
(3/3) Flavor - The name and the flavor text are quite good, and they both make a lot of sense on a card like this.
Polish
(1/3) Quality - In the list of keywords, the words "Strike", "Haste", and "Trample" should all NOT be capitalized (#11 in MOQ1, one whole point deducted as the error is repeated three times, which is a lot and definitely too many). Rarity is missing, as already mentioned (one whole point deducted again, because rarity is a fundamental part of a Magic card).
(1.5/2) Main Challenge - This fits the main challenge because it hits all players, so it certainly hits your opponents. Still, I think that a card that only hits your opponent would have fit the main challenge even better.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 16/25
Please note: this judgment has been almost completely redone from its first version because I completely misunderstood how this card works. This card only makes the first mana an opponent adds to his or her mana pool colorless, not ALL mana he or she adds, as I understood at first. Thanks to admirableadmiral for making me notice this.
As a result of this, both some scores and a lot of critiques have been added or modified. Scores that changed are underlined. Striked parts refer to the original judgment and aren't valid anymore. Parts of critiques that have been added or modified are red.
Design
(1/3) Appeal - Griefer Timmies would be interested in the version of this card as I understood at first, but it's for the best that not even them are interested in what the card actually does. I don't think Johnny would be that interested. Some Spikes will appreciate cutting off the opponent from the game with this, except they won't. Let's say they would like to, but it's definitely better that Spike doesn't get to do that as I understood at first.
(0/3) Elegance - This is almost the opposite of elegance. The effect is very hard to understand immediately and requires being read multiple times, especially because the way it is worded is quite convoluted. As for the card making sense as a whole, that's mostly just because the flavor text does huge work there. This all still holds true, but I just have to add that if the wording is so complex that a ten-year-long player as myself misunderstands it, something must be really wrong in this area.
Development
(2/3) Viability - I don't know which color could have an ability like this. Maybe green, because of its interaction with lands and mana, or blue, because it has color word changing effects. Anyway, as it's not that well defined, I can see it being on a colorless card. Rarity is the least it can be, I'd like to see this bumped up to mythic for its complexity and uniqueness. Complexity because an experienced player misunderstanding this card definitely means that its complexity level is certainly more than enough to be bumped up to the maximum of rarity. Uniqueness because no card ever did something like this (I can't remember a single existing card that cares or does something with only the first mana a player adds to his or her mana pool), and it's certainly splashy enough of an effect to deserve being mythic.
(2/3) Balance - Ok, my misunderstanding completely changes my judgment here. I'm very glad I misunderstood the card, because the card how I understood it was pretty obnoxious and irritating to play against. Changing only the first mana an opponent adds to his or her mana pool is much more reasonable, and has a lot less unfun side effects. What it does in practice is turning one-drops into two-drops, because you have to add a colorless mana you won't use to be able to get the one colored mana you need, or making cards with no generic mana in their mana costs even harder to cast then they already are. Neither of these effects are as bad as I feared, and the replacement effect will actually apply much less often than I thought. That's a good thing, and it's definitely enough to make the mana cost you propose acceptable. This is playable in limited, but more for its stats than its effect. I don't see this getting played in constructed. I see no particular problems in casual and multiplayer. Only being able to make the first mana colorless helps a lot there, and it also makes the card much more fun to play, even if I don't consider cards that deprive opponents of resources that fun from the other side of the table. At least this only does partially, as once you have a single colorless mana in your mana pool, you're good to go.
Creativity
(3/3) Uniqueness - Well, I can't certainly remember something like this before.
(2/3) Flavor - The name may be fine, but I had to google "Ennui" to know what is means, and that's not that good. The flavor text is very good and explains very nicely both this card being colorless and its mechanics.
Polish
(2.5/3) Quality - This is not a triggered ability, so having an intervening if is at least bad looking and at worst wrong. I'd suggest either putting an "and" in the place of the first comma,
or rewording the first condition to "…any amount of colored mana…"(You can't do this because it would be a functional change, but you still can and should word this with the "and") and getting rid of the fake intervening if (I'd choose this second option,half a point deducted anyway).(2/2) Main Challenge - Finally a card that only hurts your opponents and not also yourself. This fits perfectly the main challenge.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 16.5/25
Additional judging done.
thenoodler
Design
(1.5/3) Appeal - Timmy likes this: big, powerful and heavily afffects the battlefield. Johnny doesn't care. Spike likes making opponents sacrifice permanents, but not at cmc 8.
(3/3) Elegance - I see no problems here.
Development
(3/3) Viability - Haste is primary red and secondary black, intimidate the reverse, and while making opponents sacrifice permanents feels more black than red to me, there are enough precedents in red to say this is ok. Given the huge effect this has on the battlefield, I'd say putting this at mythic looks like the right choice. I wouldn't want to see too many of these floating around in limited.
(1/3) Balance - This surely deserves costing eight mana, as it can very easily be a one-sided Wrath that also leaves behind a 6/3 and with haste and intimidate on top of that. At least, two permanents will be sacrificed, and that's already enough to make this card very powerful. There may be an hidden drawback though: do you really need an eight-mana finisher in a black/red deck? I'd almost say that if you need this in your black/red deck, you must be doing something wrong. Such a deck wants the game to be already closed on turn eight, and if you don't close it by then, you're losing anyway. Yes, this may help turn some of those losses into wins, but at the cost of slowing your deck, which may cost you more losses in the early game. To me, this feels like a wonderful finisher but in the wrong colors. I don't think black/red is the ideal place for such a card. If you drop haste, blue/black would probably love it. This is a limited bomb, but the mana cost hurts a lot its constructed playability. The only problem I can see in casual and multiplayer formats is that making the opponent sacrifice anything is never fun from the other side of the table.
Creativity
(3/3) Uniqueness - I can't remember devotion being used like this in Theros block.
(1.5/3) Flavor - Name is fine. No flavor text to be judged.
Polish
(2/3) Quality - As Mogis himself shows, it's worded "devotion to black and red" (half a point deducted twice, so one whole point, because this error is repeated twice on the card).
(2/2) Main Challenge - This deprives opponents of permanents, which definitely are a resource, and does not affect you too, so everything is fine here.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 19/25
Design
(1.5/3) Appeal - Timmy doesn't care. Johnny might use this as a last resort to protect his combo. Spike loves scalable discard like this, and he also likes that it's random, so the opponent won't just discard his weakest card.
(3/3) Elegance - I see no problems here.
Development
(2.5/3) Viability - Black has all forms of discard, so random discard too, but this actually feels a black/red card to me. I'd see it costed at 1BR with a hybrid multikicker cost of 1(B/R), but as I said there's nothing wrong with this card as is from a color pie point of view. That's just how to make an already acceptable thing even better, at least in my opinion. I can't see something like this being anything less than a rare.
(2/3) Balance - Mind Rot has never been known to be a widely playable card, but it's a good reference point to start. This has a slightly higher cost, because of the double colored mana in the mana cost, and makes the opponent discard only one card, but he doesn't get to choose which one. That feels balanced to me. Making additional discards cost one mana less feels acceptable too, in the end it'll cost you five mana to make the opponent discard two cards and seven mana to make him or her discard three. At seven mana you expect a card to be game changing. This is playable in limited if you have room for a non-removal, non-combat-trick in your deck. I'd say this is more playable than Mind Rot in constructed, not that it's an high bar. The only problem I see in casual and multiplayer is that discarding a bunch of cards at random isn't certainly fun for the opponent, but in the end, again, you're paying a bunch of mana to do it, so something game changing is to be expected.
Creativity
(2/3) Uniqueness - I don't remember a discard spell with multikicker (I may be wrong though), and the discard being random adds a nice twist on a classic effect.
(3/3) Flavor - The name is very good for a card like this. It reflects the mechanics very nicely. I see nothing particularly wrong with the flavor text.
Polish
(3/3) Quality - All good here.
(2/2) Main Challenge - Cards in hand are definitely a resource and this only affects your opponents, so it fits the main challenge perfectly.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 21/25
RaikouRider: 17.5
SelesnyaNewLife: 17
sperlman: 16
Jimmy Groove: 16.5
thenoodler: 19
Moss_Elemental: 21
MCC - Winner (6): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019 || Host (15): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here) || Judge (34): every month from Nov 2014 to Nov 2016 except Oct 2015, every month from Feb to Jul 2017 except Apr 2017, then Oct 2017, May Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here)
CCL - Winner (3): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last one here) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016
DCC - Winner (1): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar) || Host (3): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016
• The two public custom sets I've been part a part of the design team for:
"Brotherhood of Ormos" - Blog post with all info - set thread - design skeleton / card list || "Extinctia: Homo Evanuit" - Blog post with all info - set thread - card list spreadsheet
• "The Lion's Lair", my article series about MTG and custom card design in particular. Latest article here. Here is the article index. Rather outdated by now, and based on the old MCC rubric, but I'm leaving this here for anybody that might be interested anyway.
• My only public attempt at being a writer: the story of my Leonin custom planeswalker Jeff Lionheart. (I have a very big one that I'm working on right now but that's private for now, and I don't know if I will ever actually publish it, and I also have ideas for multiple future ones, including one where I'm going to reprise Jeff.)