Kozilek continues his assault on reality. The destruction wrought is unimaginable and takes on numerous forms. Round 2 will push you further as you create a swath of incompressible destruction of your own. Your challenge:
Main Challenge: Create a non creature card that includes at least three of the following effects:
Destroying one or more creatures and/or other permanent types.
Sacrificing one or more creatures and/or other permanent types.
Exiling one or more creatures and/or other permanent types.
Returning one or more creatures and/or other permanent types to his or her owners hand.
Dealing damage to one or more creatures.
Giving some value of -X/-X to one or more creatures.
Sub Challenge 1: Your card has a single color identity. (colorless doesn't count)
Sub Challenge 2: Your card includes flavor text.
Clarifications
"Creatures and/or other permanent types." can mean just effecting creatures, lands, artifacts, etc... individually, targeting a group of permanent types (like nonlands,) or all permanent types at once.
Color Identity includes colored mana symbols in the rules text. A card with a white mana cost and a red activated ability violates the first sub challenge for example.
If you card includes flavor text but doesn't actually have room for it, expect to lose points.
Design - (X/3) Appeal: Do the different player psychographics (Timmy/Johhny/Spike) have a use for the card? (X/3) Elegance: Is the card easily understandable at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
Development - (X/3) Viability: 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? (X/3) Balance: 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 or fit into a deck/archetype? Does it create an oppressive environment?
Creativity - (X/3) Uniqueness: 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”? (X/3) Flavor: 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 - (X/3) Quality: Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating. (X/2) *Main Challenge: Was the main challenge satisfied? Was it approached in a unique or interesting way? Does the card fit the intent of the challenge? (X/2) Subchallenges: One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Total: X/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
The deadline for submissions is Monday, February 15th 11:59 PM EST. The judge deadline will be next Thursday, February 18th at the same hour. Best of luck!
Smear PoisonUR
Sorcery (U)
As an additional cost to cast Smear Poison sacrifice a creature.
Proliferate
Wither
Smear Poison deals 2 damage to each creature. Well, that's a nasty spill...
Unstable mirrorWWW
Enchantment (R)
When Unstable mirror enters the battlefield, you may exile target nonland permanent until Unstable mirror leaves the battlefield. (That permanent returns under its owner's control.)
Sacrifice another enchantment: return Unstable mirror to its owner's hand. Once you gazed in the mirror, your only hope is that someone else gazes next.
This one seems to favor the clever. Hope that's me!
Twisting Nether 5BB
Sorcery (R)
Each player sacrifices 4 lands. Creatures get -4/-4 until end of turn. If a permanent would enter the graveyard from the battlefield this turn, exile it instead. "The void will call. And you will answer."
Goblin SealXRR
Enchantment (R)
Goblin Seal enters the battlefield with X charge counters on it.
Sacrifice Goblin Seal: Goblin Seal deals damage equal to the number of charge counters on it to each creature. Destroy each artifact with converted mana cost equal to or less than the number of charge counters on Goblin Seal. His secret weapon blows up everything — including himself.
Curse of the Chain Veil1BB
Sorcery [M]
Choose a creature. That creature's controller sacrifices it. If Curse of the Chain Veil's madness cost was paid, destroy all creatures instead.
Madness 2BB "It takes me all my strength afforded by pacts with countless ancient demons to withstand the chain veil for even a moment. With your mortal form, it would kill in an instant."
—Liliana
Blood Miasma1BB
Sorcery (R)
As an additional cost to cast Soul Miasma, sacrifice a creature.
Creatures your opponents control get -4/-4 until end of turn. If a creature would die this turn, exile it instead. "Everyone with blood has power, but very few can release it. I can help release it from anyone."
- Ebonstorm, dark mage
Coiling Void Rift3BB
Sorcery (R)
As an additional cost to cast Coiling Void Hands, return X creatures to their owners' hands.
Destroy X target creatures. For each creature destroyed in this way, creatures that share a color with it get -1/-1 until end of turn. Those that weren't simply turned inside out by the tear in the sky often felt that they were.
Spread the Infection3BB
Sorcery (R)
As an additional cost to cast Spread the Infection, sacrifice a creature.
Creatures target opponent controls that share a creature type with the sacrificed creature get -X/-X until end of turn, where X is the sacrificed creature's toughness. That opponent discards X cards. If a creature card is discarded this way, exile it instead. The sickness spread swiftly, surging from the source.
Furnace BlastR
Instant (U)
As an additional cost to cast Furnace Blast, sacrifice an artifact.
Furnace Blast deals damage to target creature or player equal to the converted mana cost of the sacrificed artifact. If a creature dealt damage by Furnace Blast would die this turn, exile it instead. "Accidents happen. It's the price of industry." --Daretti, Scrap Savant
Wreaking BlowXXR
Sorcery (R)
Choose up to X —
• Destroy up to X target artifacts.
• Each opponent sacrifices X lands.
• Wreaking Blow deals 3 damage up to X target creatures and/or players. After it, there's no then.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Trophyless guy.
Thought of the Month: I gave up from trying to require the 'i' on my name: SolesticIo
End of Reason2R
Sorcery (R)
As an additional cost to cast End of Reason, sacrifice X permanents.
End of Reason deals X damage divided as you choose among any number of target creatures and/or players. If a creature dealt damage this way would die this turn, exile it instead. "You have served me well as soldiers. Now serve me as projectiles!"
-Urabrask the Hidden
Xeier, Scythe of CarnageBBB
Artifact - Equipment (Mythic)
You may sacrifice three creatures rater than pay Xeier's mana cost.
Equipped creature has "This creature gets +X/+X and other creatures gets -X/-X, where X's the number of creature cards in your graveyard."
Equip - Exile three creature cards from your graveyard. A blade that's made of thousends of souls could never be satisfied.
Body-Bound Skaab3U
Creature - Zombie (U)
Champion a Human
Whenever Body-Bound Skaab attacks, you may return target creature with converted mana cost less than or equal to the championed card's converted mana cost to its owners hand. "The design regrettably requires the power source to survive the process, but at least their priceless faces make up for it."
—Stitcher Geralf
5/4
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
Color identity is defined by adding three things together:
1) Color of card, including both sides of DFCs
2) Mana symbols in the casting cost
3) Mana symbols in the text box
So, although the card is colorless, the mana symbols in the casting cost will add those colors to the card's color identity, meaning it is not considered colorless for color identity.
Scion Shrapnel2RG
Enchantment {R}
Devoid (This card has no color.)
Whenever you sacrifice a colorless creature, Scion Shrapnel deals damage equal to the sacrificed creature's power to target creature an opponent controls. If that creature would die this turn, exile it instead.
Sacrifice a creature: Add C to your mana pool.
Phyrexian MartyrdomW
Enchantment - Aura (R)
Enchant creature
Enchanted creature blocks each turn if able.
Whenever enchanted creature attacks or blocks, put a -1/-1 counter on it and you gain 2 life.
Enchanted creature has "3, Sacrifice this creature: Exile target permanent with converted mana cost greater than this creature's power." Death for Phyrexia is immortality.
Battle DispellerWW
Creature - Human Cleric Knight (U)
Flanking
Sacrifice an artifact or enchantment: Exile target artifact or enchantment. Tek knights hold a baptism for their swords as they do for their sons
2/2
Check my "Mark of Quality" articles (link in signature) for a list of the most common Quality mistakes to avoid.
Challenges: what counts is always the letter of the law, unless explicit specifications of the host.
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.
Fresh Bones1B
Sorcery (U)
As an additional cost to cast Fresh Bones, sacrifice a creature.
Destroy target creature. Return target creature card that wasn’t put into your graveyard this turn from your graveyard to your hand. “Look at these bones! I’m sure they will make very good splinters...”
Fire of RebirthBR
Instant (U)
Choose one —
• Fire of Rebirth deals 3 damage to target creature. If that creature would die this turn, exile it instead.
• Return target creature card in a graveyard to its owner’s hand.
Entwine 2(Choose both if you pay the entwine cost.)
(D'OH! I just realized that the main challenge says returning to hand as bouncing from the battlefield, not returning a card from a graveyard... well, I like these card so I'm leaving them here anyway.)
Assault of the Horde2RWB
Sorcery (R)
Assault of the Horde deals 2 damage to target creature. Destroy another target creature. Exile a third target creature. Nothing stands where the Mardu Horde has passed.
Color identity is defined by adding three things together:
1) Color of card, including both sides of DFCs
2) Mana symbols in the casting cost
3) Mana symbols in the text box
So, although the card is colorless, the mana symbols in the casting cost will add those colors to the card's color identity, meaning it is not considered colorless for color identity.
You're very probably right, with the specification that point 1 is actually the color indicator of the card. I'll check the CR just to be sure. I'll come back to you soon.
EDIT (before doing any actual judging): And soon is right now. It turns out I forgot one thing myself (CDAs). The CR have this to say (bold is emphasis mine):
Quote from CR (OGW Edition) »
903.4. The Commander variant uses color identity to determine what cards can be in a deck with a certain commander. The color identity of a card is the color or colors of any mana symbols in that card’s mana cost or rules text, plus any colors defined by its characteristic-defining abilities (see rule 604.3) or color indicator (see rule 204). Example: Bosh, Iron Golem is a legendary artifact creature with mana cost 8 and the ability “3R, Sacrifice an artifact: Bosh, Iron Golem deals damage equal to the sacrificed artifact's converted mana cost to target creature or player.” Bosh’s color identity is red.
903.4a Color identity is established before the game begins.
903.4b Reminder text is ignored when determining a card’s color identity. See rule 207.2.
903.4c The back face of a double-faced card (see rule 711) is included when determining a card’s color identity. This is an exception to rule 711.4a. Example: Civilized Scholar is the front face of a double-faced card with mana cost 2U. Homicidal Brute is the back face of that double-faced card and has a red color indicator. The card’s color identity is blue and red.
So yes, your card does have a red and green color identity. There are a red symbol and a green symbol in its mana cost, devoid's reminder text is ignored so it doesn't take any color away from the color identity, and the colorless mana symbol in the rules text is, well... colorless, so it doesn't add any other color to the color identity because... (all toghether now!) colorless is not a color!
Scion Shrapnel2RG
Enchantment {R}
Devoid (This card has no color.)
Whenever you sacrifice a colorless creature, Scion Shrapnel deals damage equal to the sacrificed creature's power to target creature an opponent controls. If that creature would die this turn, exile it instead.
Sacrifice a creature: Add C to your mana pool.
Design (2/3) Appeal - Timmy doesn't like to sacrifice creatures, though at least he does so to deal damage to opposing creatures, which is something he likes. Johnny may try something with the triggered ability, but there are quite a few restrictions he has to play around. I'm thinking of something involving Stuffy Doll: you cast it naming the opponent, then you give it to them and start sacrificing colorless creatures to deal damage to the Doll, which then does that much damage to (what is now) its controller. It's not impossible, just difficult, but luckily Johnny is always up for a challenge. Spike always likes removal, and particularly appreciates the fact that this has a built-in mechanism to sacrifice creatures. (2.5/3) Elegance - A bit wordy, but as clear as it can be.
Development (3/3) Viability - Dealing damage is red, adding mana is green: color pie? Check! Rarity feels good to me, especially given how the two abilities interact. (2.5/3) Balance - This can be very good in an environment full of colorless creatures like OGW/BFZ or, say, an artifact block. Even though it takes away some of the appeal of the card, not targeting players is very probably the right decision for the damage ability, as then you could fling Golems, Eldrazi, or anything else big enough to your opponent's face at will, and that looks quite overpowered indeed. I expect this to be playable in limited if the red/green color combination is about colorless creatures (in BFZ it's about landfall instead, but something like this could have easily fit in one of the color pairs about devoid). In constructed this might be playable in formats that have enough colorless creatures for this to interact with. The older the format, the easier that will be, but the more the relatively high CMC will play against this. In other words, this requires either an environment built around colorless, or a format big enough to have enough colorless creatures. An example of the latter might be Modern: but if you're playing an Affinity deck, for example, do you see yourself casting this as your turn 4 play? I'm not sure. I don't see any particular problem in casual or multiplayer.
Creativity (2.5/3) Uniqueness - Very few cards in Magic have the trigger "Whenever you sacrifice (something)", so that part of the card definitely feels original. The rest no so much though, but I want to prize the original part. (1.5/3) Flavor - The name is fine and makes sense with the mechanics. No flavor text.
Polish (3/3) Quality - All good. (2/2) Main Challenge - Sacrifice, deal damage, exile. Three things. (0/2) Subchallenges - None met. The color identity of this card is indeed red/green as detailed above, but the subchallenge asked for a monocolored color identity. Subchallenge 1 wouldn't have been met anyway even if this card had a colorless color identity because of devoid, and beside that it explicitly says "colorless doesn't count" in the challenge. Subchallenge 2 asked for some flavor text to be there, and here there is none.
Unstable mirrorWWW
Enchantment (R)
When Unstable mirror enters the battlefield, you may exile target nonland permanent until Unstable mirror leaves the battlefield. (That permanent returns under its owner's control.)
Sacrifice another enchantment: return Unstable mirror to its owner's hand. Once you gazed in the mirror, your only hope is that someone else gazes next.
Design (1.5/3) Appeal - Timmy doesn't care, and I actually expect him to despise a card like this that always removes his best creature, and if he plays a better one can be reused on the new one. I honestly can't see anything particular for Johnny to do. This is a pure Spike card, as he's the one that likes removal the best (especially reusable one), and does that job quite well. (3/3) Elegance - No problems here.
Development (2.5/3) Viability - White has temporary exile, interaction with enchantments, and self-bounce, so no problem as far as the color pie is concerned. This card feels appropriate at rare for today's standards, given that it's reusable removal, but I think that being rare is enough, I don't think such a restrictive mana cost was necessary. 1WW at rare would have been just fine. With a triple-white cost I could almost see this at uncommon. (2.5/3) Balance - This card is certainly playable in limited if you're primary white. The mana cost is quite restrictive, as I've already mentioned, maybe too much. You will already have a hard time casting this if white is your second color, let alone a splash. I expect this to be also constructed playable in enchantment-based environments, like Theros for example. Out of those, I'm not sure. Wherever there are enchantment decks, including casual, this is playable.
Creativity (2/3) Uniqueness - This card is not unique, but it's a nice new twist on an effect that is very well known by now (the O-Ring effect). (3/3) Flavor - The flavor works: name, mechanics, and flavor text help reinforce one another. Well done.
Polish (1/3) Quality - The word "mirror" should be capitalized in the card's name (one whole point deducted because there are way too many instances of this mistakes, four total: one in the name and three more in the rules text whenever the card's name is mentioned). Reminder text is always in italics (one whole point deducted because this is a very well known fact). (2/2) Main Challenge - Exile, sacrifice, bounce. Three things. (2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
End of Reason2R
Sorcery (R)
As an additional cost to cast End of Reason, sacrifice X permanents.
End of Reason deals X damage divided as you choose among any number of target creatures and/or players. If a creature dealt damage this way would die this turn, exile it instead. "You have served me well as soldiers. Now serve me as projectiles!"
-Urabrask the Hidden
Design (2/3) Appeal - Timmy doesn't like to sacrifice things, but the visual feedback if he does is great. Johnny may do something with the sacrifice. Spike always likes removal, and dividing damage as most convenient for him is even better for him. (3/3) Elegance - No problems here.
Development (3/3) Viability - Everything is in color. The fact that you can sacrifice everything you control (notably including lands) to deal all damage to the opponent's face and using this as a finisher justifies it being at rare. (2/3) Balance - I've already hinted at the remarkable fact that this does not say "sacrifice X nonland permanents", so you can sacrifice lands too. While this makes a lot of sense in red's philosophy, it also honestly worries me a bit with regard to the card's power level. As I was already saying, sacrificing everything to burn your opponent out of the game feels like a very powerful play, and I'm not sure three mana is enough of a cost for that potential. As I usually say in these cases, playtest would be needed. If this proves too much indeed, there are two solution: increasing the mana cost as needed, or adding "nonland". I'm not sure which one I would choose in a vacuum, but playtest also should indicate the best direction to take. As for this card's playability in different formats, this is certainly playable in limited, and might also be playable in constructed monored decks as a finisher as I've just explained. I don't see any specific problems in casual or multiplayer.
Creativity (1.5/3) Uniqueness - A new twist on Fling, never done before indeed but not the best of originality. (2/3) Flavor - Unless I'm missing something, the name and flavor text are both fine if taken each by themselves, but they appear completely disconnected from one another. Between the two, I'd keep the flavor text, which really makes a lot of sense with the mechanics, and I'd try to come up with a Urabrask-related name.
Polish (3/3) Quality - All good. (2/2) Main Challenge - Sacrifice, deal damage, exile. Three things. (2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Goblin SealXRR
Enchantment (R)
Goblin Seal enters the battlefield with X charge counters on it.
Sacrifice Goblin Seal: Goblin Seal deals damage equal to the number of charge counters on it to each creature. Destroy each artifact with converted mana cost equal to or less than the number of charge counters on Goblin Seal. His secret weapon blows up everything — including himself.
Design (2.5/3) Appeal - Timmy loves this, as it can produce big swings in gameplay and has an amazing visual feedback. Maybe Johnny can do something with the damage ability or try recurring the enchantment. Spike just sees this as a red Wrath that goes off at his command, which is not bad at all for him. (2.5/3) Elegance - A bit wordy, but as clear as it can be.
Development (3/3) Viability - Everything is in color and rarity is definitely appropriate. (2.5/3) Balance - This is certainly playable in limited and can be quite explosive there if played in the late game to break stalls. I think it may cost a bit too much for constructed, but I can't exclude this seeing some Standard play. I can't see particular problems in casual or multiplayer. Actually, this gets stronger in multiplayer, just like any effect that deals damage to "each creature".
Creativity (2/3) Uniqueness - Dealing mass damage to creature and mass-destroying artifacts are not the most original things, but I can't remember any card that puts them together, so the end result feels somewhat original. (3/3) Flavor - The name is fine by itself and fits well the use of the word "Seal" in Magic card names (enchantments that sacrifice themselves for free for an effect). The flavor text really makes sense with the mechanics and helps sell the name because of the established convention that Goblins are, let's say, not the smartest living beings in the Multiverse...
Polish (3/3) Quality - All good. (2/2) Main Challenge - Sacrifice, deal damage, destroy. Three things. (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.)
Wreaking BlowXXR
Sorcery (R)
Choose up to X —
• Destroy up to X target artifacts.
• Each opponent sacrifices X lands.
• Wreaking Blow deals 3 damage up to X target creatures and/or players. After it, there's no then.
Design - (2/3) Appeal: Spike loves the options and efficiency here, thinking of the best way she can leverage the options to her advantage. Timmy loves X spells, especially ones that scale as insanely as this. However the XX is a minor concern. Johnny has nearly no interest in a card like this. (0.5/3) Elegance: This is not an elegant card. A cost of XXR is already a mana cost that sacrifices elegance and adds comprehension complexity to gain versatility. This can also be aesthetically patched to some degree with cards like Fall of the Titans, having the two targets mirror the two X's etc. However with your card you continue adding X's both increasing the targets and the options, while also having 3 options to the double X's thus not having similar mirroring of 2. Even 4 options would of been better aesthetically. Figuring out what this will burn, destroy and sacrifice is an exercise in itself which can be fine for a rare (see Conjured Currency) but doesn't make for an elegant design. Finally the flavor text feels unneeded tacked on just for the requirement of the challenge, Choose cards rarely have flavor text even with the dot point templating change.
Development - (3/3) Viability: This works within the rules of the game and the color pie. You even made sure to include "up to" on your X targets so that the cards works as intended. (1.5/3) Balance: I'm pretty sure this card is very strong, bordering on slightly overpowered, especially with the combinations of damage and land destruction. The 4R mode of bolting two creatures and having each opponent sac two lands is a brutal standard play depending on the environment's toughness and even more so in an enviorment with playable artifacts. The land destruction finally makes this completely backbreaking in limited which is worth keeping in mind despite being a rare.
Creativity - (2.5/3) Uniqueness: We have had modal spells with X variables like Invoke the Firemind. However we haven't had a "Choose X" spell, especially one where the effects scale on X too. (2/3) Flavor: The flavor text is reasonably generic and doesn't help create more of a sense of the card's flavor. Wreaking Blow however is a nice name but again isn't super descriptive.
Polish - (2.5/3) Quality: Looks good except for the unitalic "then", maybe that is deliberate but to me it looks like mistake. (2/2) *Main Challenge: Main challenge complete (2/2) Subchallenges: Both challenges complete
Total: 18/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Furnace BlastR
Instant (U)
As an additional cost to cast Furnace Blast, sacrifice an artifact.
Furnace Blast deals damage to target creature or player equal to the converted mana cost of the sacrificed artifact. If a creature dealt damage by Furnace Blast would die this turn, exile it instead. "Accidents happen. It's the price of industry." --Daretti, Scrap Savant
Design - (2.5/3) Appeal: Timmy isn't such a fan of sacrificing his stuff but likes the variable damage aspect, spike likewise likes the resource game of turning one resource into another, giving them plenty of choices whiles its also fairly efficient. Johnny also likes the resource change but the payoff isn't at all interesting to him. Overall it appeal to most of them but not to a massive extent. (2/3) Elegance: The card for the most part is really elegant, not a elegant as Shrapnel Blast however, due mainly to the exile clause. However the converted mana cost while having interesting gameplay and allowing the cheap cost means its not as clean as well.
Development - (3/3) Viability: Full marks, this card is red and viable. (2.5/3) Balance: Theses types of cards can be difficult to evaluate power level wise, I suspect its a little on the weak side as the CMC means it is super hard to "cheat" the card outside of most older formats. But its fine if narrow.
Creativity - (1.5/3) Uniqueness: The CMC and exile clause do a good job at differentiating this a little from the previously mentioned Shrapnel Blast, but not enough for a high uniqueness mark. (2.5/3) Flavor: Flavor text is great, not sure why a furnace exiles however.
Polish - (2.5/3) Quality: The quoted character for the flavor text needs to be on a new line. Otherwise fine. (2/2) *Main Challenge: Fits the challenge. (2/2) Subchallenges: Subchallenges complete
Total: 18.5/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Emergency EvacuationXRR
Sorcery (R)
Spend only blue mana on X.
Return up to X target creatures you control to their owners' hands. Then, Emergency Evacuation deals 2 damage to each creature. If a creature dealt damage this way would die this turn, exile it instead. "Keep your friends close, and your ejection lever closer."
Design - (1.5/3) Appeal: Spike likes the options and the ability to get a lot of value by playing well. It isn't a big enough effect for timmy most of the time and is of little interest for johnny however. (1/3) Elegance: "Spend only blue mana on X." is both a restrictive and inelegant line of rules text, there is a goodreason it is so rarely using in modern design. Likewise the Exile is probably not needed outside this challenge and the X spell mana being a different color is super weird. I know you want the mono color subchallenge points but I think your overall score would of been higher with simply a blue/red multicolor spell.
Development - (2/3) Viability: Because of the color restriction of the bounce this strictly fits in the color pie however that blue mana restriction is less likely obvious to non designers and I can imagine the cries of "Since when does mono red bounce?" (2.5/3) Balance: a RR Pyroclasm with upside is probably pushing it a tiny bit but the double restriction needed is probably fine for the most part.
Creativity - (2.5/3) Uniqueness:While it is inelegantly stapling two base effects together it is doing it in a fun way that we haven't seen before for the most part. (1.5/3) Flavor: The name fits really well but the flavor text is a big letdown, both not being super interesting but also not fitting the feel of magic.
Polish - (2.5/3) Quality: The "Then," isn't required. Overwise its fine (3/2) *Main Challenge: Yep! (2/2) Subchallenges: Yes, even though I suspect it wasn't worth it.
Total: 18.5/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Front side: Yrall the Foul3BB
Planeswalker - Yrall (M)
When Yrall the Foul is put into your graveyard from the battlefield, return her to the battlefield transformed.
-X: Sacrifice up to X creatures. Add BB to your mana pool for each creature sacrificed this way.
-X: Until end of turn, creatures you control gain “Whenever this creature attacks, target creature gets -X/-X until end of turn.”
-X: Each player exiles X permanents he or she controls.
Loyalty: 7
Back Side: Yrall’s Legacy
(Color Indicator: Black) Legendary Enchantment (M)
All creatures get -1/-1.
Whenever a planeswalker enters the battlefield, remove a loyalty counter from it. Although she left a long time ago, Yrall’s deeds still torment this world.
Design - (3/3) Appeal: Spike loves the options, Timmy may find the big mana and ability to kill huge amounts of creatures exciting while Johnny wants to use the big mana to combo off and maybe do something silly with the flip side. (0/3) Elegance: Your a brave soul, in these types of challenges Planeswalkers and DFCs are some of the highest risk cards to make. They have so many developmental knobs to tweak but leave you with inelegant looking designs without strong top down flavor to tie it together. Your card has a nice idea, a Planeswalker with only minus abilities that leaves a effect when it dies. Thats cool. However your abilities don't seem to tie together well and them all being -X loyalty makes the choices less interesting, the card harder to balance, the death less meaningful AND the card less elegant. Even the backside has the random planeswalker damage ability which is cool but yet another unnecessary element in a already overstuffed design.
Development - (2.5/3) Viability: Rarity and color pie are fine, the BB sac ability is maybe more Red now days however. My main issue is that this design as isn't at all viable to print. (0/3) Balance: Historically DFCs and Planeswalkers are some of the hardest cards to mentally playtest, design and evaluate. Likewise X spells and how they scale also are tipically more difficult to figure out. This combines all these difficult elements and showcases how easily it can go wrong. Now thats not a critique on you as a designer you took on one of the most challenging card types and combined it with other elements that are also super tricky so its not surprising how broken this is no matter how good you are. All the -X modes range from just strong to bonkers (the -X/-X attack mode is a one sided board wipe if you have an equal number of creatures.) Even if they kill this it makes a super powerful effect, especially if your the player is building around it.
Creativity - (2.5/3) Uniqueness: We have had Garruk's DFC but that was very different. This is a cool new space to explore but it didn't come together in execution. (2.5/3) Flavor: By far my favourite part of the card is the story it tells. Her abilities are unfortunately a little all over the place flavor wise with both sacrifice and exile themes etc.
Polish - (3/3) Quality: Good. Even got the color indicator. (2/2) *Main Challenge: Yup! (2/2) Subchallenges: Flavor text on the backside checks out
Total: 17.5/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Kozilek continues his assault on reality. The destruction wrought is unimaginable and takes on numerous forms. Round 2 will push you further as you create a swath of incompressible destruction of your own. Your challenge:
Main Challenge: Create a non creature card that includes at least three of the following effects:
Sub Challenge 2: Your card includes flavor text.
Clarifications
(X/3) Appeal: Do the different player psychographics (Timmy/Johhny/Spike) have a use for the card?
(X/3) Elegance: Is the card easily understandable at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
Development -
(X/3) Viability: 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?
(X/3) Balance: 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 or fit into a deck/archetype? Does it create an oppressive environment?
Creativity -
(X/3) Uniqueness: 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”?
(X/3) Flavor: 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 -
(X/3) Quality: Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
(X/2) *Main Challenge: Was the main challenge satisfied? Was it approached in a unique or interesting way? Does the card fit the intent of the challenge?
(X/2) Subchallenges: One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Total: X/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Our Judges:
IcariiFA
Doombringer
sperlman
Piar
bravelion83
Our Players:
~Aura~
admirableadmiral
bubblecat2
doomfish
glurman
Hemlock
Jimmy Groove
maplesmall
Moss_Elemental
netn10
RaikouRider
Rhand
RickyRister
shinike1729
Solesticio
theazurespirit
thenoodler
TriceDefied
void_nothing
willows
The deadline for submissions is Monday, February 15th 11:59 PM EST. The judge deadline will be next Thursday, February 18th at the same hour. Best of luck!
Sorcery (U)
As an additional cost to cast Smear Poison sacrifice a creature.
Proliferate
Wither
Smear Poison deals 2 damage to each creature.
Well, that's a nasty spill...
Enchantment (R)
When Unstable mirror enters the battlefield, you may exile target nonland permanent until Unstable mirror leaves the battlefield. (That permanent returns under its owner's control.)
Sacrifice another enchantment: return Unstable mirror to its owner's hand.
Once you gazed in the mirror, your only hope is that someone else gazes next.
Twisting Nether 5BB
Sorcery (R)
Each player sacrifices 4 lands. Creatures get -4/-4 until end of turn. If a permanent would enter the graveyard from the battlefield this turn, exile it instead.
"The void will call. And you will answer."
Enchantment (R)
Goblin Seal enters the battlefield with X charge counters on it.
Sacrifice Goblin Seal: Goblin Seal deals damage equal to the number of charge counters on it to each creature. Destroy each artifact with converted mana cost equal to or less than the number of charge counters on Goblin Seal.
His secret weapon blows up everything — including himself.
Sorcery [M]
Choose a creature. That creature's controller sacrifices it. If Curse of the Chain Veil's madness cost was paid, destroy all creatures instead.
Madness 2BB
"It takes me all my strength afforded by pacts with countless ancient demons to withstand the chain veil for even a moment. With your mortal form, it would kill in an instant."
—Liliana
Sorcery (R)
As an additional cost to cast Soul Miasma, sacrifice a creature.
Creatures your opponents control get -4/-4 until end of turn. If a creature would die this turn, exile it instead.
"Everyone with blood has power, but very few can release it. I can help release it from anyone."
- Ebonstorm, dark mage
Sorcery (R)
As an additional cost to cast Coiling Void Hands, return X creatures to their owners' hands.
Destroy X target creatures. For each creature destroyed in this way, creatures that share a color with it get -1/-1 until end of turn.
Those that weren't simply turned inside out by the tear in the sky often felt that they were.
Sorcery (R)
As an additional cost to cast Spread the Infection, sacrifice a creature.
Creatures target opponent controls that share a creature type with the sacrificed creature get -X/-X until end of turn, where X is the sacrificed creature's toughness. That opponent discards X cards. If a creature card is discarded this way, exile it instead.
The sickness spread swiftly, surging from the source.
Instant (U)
As an additional cost to cast Furnace Blast, sacrifice an artifact.
Furnace Blast deals damage to target creature or player equal to the converted mana cost of the sacrificed artifact. If a creature dealt damage by Furnace Blast would die this turn, exile it instead.
"Accidents happen. It's the price of industry." --Daretti, Scrap Savant
Sorcery (R)
Choose up to X —
• Destroy up to X target artifacts.
• Each opponent sacrifices X lands.
• Wreaking Blow deals 3 damage up to X target creatures and/or players.
After it, there's no then.
Thought of the Month:
I gave up from trying to require the 'i' on my name: SolesticIo
Sorcery (R)
As an additional cost to cast End of Reason, sacrifice X permanents.
End of Reason deals X damage divided as you choose among any number of target creatures and/or players. If a creature dealt damage this way would die this turn, exile it instead.
"You have served me well as soldiers. Now serve me as projectiles!"
-Urabrask the Hidden
Artifact - Equipment (Mythic)
You may sacrifice three creatures rater than pay Xeier's mana cost.
Equipped creature has "This creature gets +X/+X and other creatures gets -X/-X, where X's the number of creature cards in your graveyard."
Equip - Exile three creature cards from your graveyard.
A blade that's made of thousends of souls could never be satisfied.
Creature - Zombie (U)
Champion a Human
Whenever Body-Bound Skaab attacks, you may return target creature with converted mana cost less than or equal to the championed card's converted mana cost to its owners hand.
"The design regrettably requires the power source to survive the process, but at least their priceless faces make up for it."
—Stitcher Geralf
5/4
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
1) Color of card, including both sides of DFCs
2) Mana symbols in the casting cost
3) Mana symbols in the text box
So, although the card is colorless, the mana symbols in the casting cost will add those colors to the card's color identity, meaning it is not considered colorless for color identity.
Scion Shrapnel 2RG
Enchantment {R}
Devoid (This card has no color.)
Whenever you sacrifice a colorless creature, Scion Shrapnel deals damage equal to the sacrificed creature's power to target creature an opponent controls. If that creature would die this turn, exile it instead.
Sacrifice a creature: Add C to your mana pool.
Emille, Seven-Sting Dancer Shalin Nariya
Enchantment - Aura (R)
Enchant creature
Enchanted creature blocks each turn if able.
Whenever enchanted creature attacks or blocks, put a -1/-1 counter on it and you gain 2 life.
Enchanted creature has "3, Sacrifice this creature: Exile target permanent with converted mana cost greater than this creature's power."
Death for Phyrexia is immortality.
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
Creature - Human Cleric Knight (U)
Flanking
Sacrifice an artifact or enchantment: Exile target artifact or enchantment.
Tek knights hold a baptism for their swords as they do for their sons
2/2
IcariiFA:
void_nothing
willows
~Aura~
admirableadmiral
Piar:
bubblecat2
doomfish
glurman
Hemlock
sperlman:
Jimmy Groove
maplesmall
Moss_Elemental
netn10
bravelion83
RaikouRider
Rhand
RickyRister
shinike1729
Doombringer:
Solesticio
theazurespirit
thenoodler
TriceDefied
Judges have until thursday night EST. Top two advance from each group. Bon Chance!
Check my "Mark of Quality" articles (link in signature) for a list of the most common Quality mistakes to avoid.
Challenges: what counts is always the letter of the law, unless explicit specifications of the host.
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.
Fresh Bones 1B
Sorcery (U)
As an additional cost to cast Fresh Bones, sacrifice a creature.
Destroy target creature. Return target creature card that wasn’t put into your graveyard this turn from your graveyard to your hand.
“Look at these bones! I’m sure they will make very good splinters...”
Fire of Rebirth BR
Instant (U)
Choose one —
• Fire of Rebirth deals 3 damage to target creature. If that creature would die this turn, exile it instead.
• Return target creature card in a graveyard to its owner’s hand.
Entwine 2 (Choose both if you pay the entwine cost.)
(D'OH! I just realized that the main challenge says returning to hand as bouncing from the battlefield, not returning a card from a graveyard... well, I like these card so I'm leaving them here anyway.)
Assault of the Horde 2RWB
Sorcery (R)
Assault of the Horde deals 2 damage to target creature. Destroy another target creature. Exile a third target creature.
Nothing stands where the Mardu Horde has passed.
You're very probably right, with the specification that point 1 is actually the color indicator of the card. I'll check the CR just to be sure. I'll come back to you soon.
EDIT (before doing any actual judging): And soon is right now. It turns out I forgot one thing myself (CDAs). The CR have this to say (bold is emphasis mine):
So yes, your card does have a red and green color identity. There are a red symbol and a green symbol in its mana cost, devoid's reminder text is ignored so it doesn't take any color away from the color identity, and the colorless mana symbol in the rules text is, well... colorless, so it doesn't add any other color to the color identity because... (all toghether now!) colorless is not a color!
Design
(2/3) Appeal - Timmy doesn't like to sacrifice creatures, though at least he does so to deal damage to opposing creatures, which is something he likes. Johnny may try something with the triggered ability, but there are quite a few restrictions he has to play around. I'm thinking of something involving Stuffy Doll: you cast it naming the opponent, then you give it to them and start sacrificing colorless creatures to deal damage to the Doll, which then does that much damage to (what is now) its controller. It's not impossible, just difficult, but luckily Johnny is always up for a challenge. Spike always likes removal, and particularly appreciates the fact that this has a built-in mechanism to sacrifice creatures.
(2.5/3) Elegance - A bit wordy, but as clear as it can be.
Development
(3/3) Viability - Dealing damage is red, adding mana is green: color pie? Check! Rarity feels good to me, especially given how the two abilities interact.
(2.5/3) Balance - This can be very good in an environment full of colorless creatures like OGW/BFZ or, say, an artifact block. Even though it takes away some of the appeal of the card, not targeting players is very probably the right decision for the damage ability, as then you could fling Golems, Eldrazi, or anything else big enough to your opponent's face at will, and that looks quite overpowered indeed. I expect this to be playable in limited if the red/green color combination is about colorless creatures (in BFZ it's about landfall instead, but something like this could have easily fit in one of the color pairs about devoid). In constructed this might be playable in formats that have enough colorless creatures for this to interact with. The older the format, the easier that will be, but the more the relatively high CMC will play against this. In other words, this requires either an environment built around colorless, or a format big enough to have enough colorless creatures. An example of the latter might be Modern: but if you're playing an Affinity deck, for example, do you see yourself casting this as your turn 4 play? I'm not sure. I don't see any particular problem in casual or multiplayer.
Creativity
(2.5/3) Uniqueness - Very few cards in Magic have the trigger "Whenever you sacrifice (something)", so that part of the card definitely feels original. The rest no so much though, but I want to prize the original part.
(1.5/3) Flavor - The name is fine and makes sense with the mechanics. No flavor text.
Polish
(3/3) Quality - All good.
(2/2) Main Challenge - Sacrifice, deal damage, exile. Three things.
(0/2) Subchallenges - None met. The color identity of this card is indeed red/green as detailed above, but the subchallenge asked for a monocolored color identity. Subchallenge 1 wouldn't have been met anyway even if this card had a colorless color identity because of devoid, and beside that it explicitly says "colorless doesn't count" in the challenge. Subchallenge 2 asked for some flavor text to be there, and here there is none.
Total: 19/25
Design
(1.5/3) Appeal - Timmy doesn't care, and I actually expect him to despise a card like this that always removes his best creature, and if he plays a better one can be reused on the new one. I honestly can't see anything particular for Johnny to do. This is a pure Spike card, as he's the one that likes removal the best (especially reusable one), and does that job quite well.
(3/3) Elegance - No problems here.
Development
(2.5/3) Viability - White has temporary exile, interaction with enchantments, and self-bounce, so no problem as far as the color pie is concerned. This card feels appropriate at rare for today's standards, given that it's reusable removal, but I think that being rare is enough, I don't think such a restrictive mana cost was necessary. 1WW at rare would have been just fine. With a triple-white cost I could almost see this at uncommon.
(2.5/3) Balance - This card is certainly playable in limited if you're primary white. The mana cost is quite restrictive, as I've already mentioned, maybe too much. You will already have a hard time casting this if white is your second color, let alone a splash. I expect this to be also constructed playable in enchantment-based environments, like Theros for example. Out of those, I'm not sure. Wherever there are enchantment decks, including casual, this is playable.
Creativity
(2/3) Uniqueness - This card is not unique, but it's a nice new twist on an effect that is very well known by now (the O-Ring effect).
(3/3) Flavor - The flavor works: name, mechanics, and flavor text help reinforce one another. Well done.
Polish
(1/3) Quality - The word "mirror" should be capitalized in the card's name (one whole point deducted because there are way too many instances of this mistakes, four total: one in the name and three more in the rules text whenever the card's name is mentioned). Reminder text is always in italics (one whole point deducted because this is a very well known fact).
(2/2) Main Challenge - Exile, sacrifice, bounce. Three things.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 19.5/25
Design
(2/3) Appeal - Timmy doesn't like to sacrifice things, but the visual feedback if he does is great. Johnny may do something with the sacrifice. Spike always likes removal, and dividing damage as most convenient for him is even better for him.
(3/3) Elegance - No problems here.
Development
(3/3) Viability - Everything is in color. The fact that you can sacrifice everything you control (notably including lands) to deal all damage to the opponent's face and using this as a finisher justifies it being at rare.
(2/3) Balance - I've already hinted at the remarkable fact that this does not say "sacrifice X nonland permanents", so you can sacrifice lands too. While this makes a lot of sense in red's philosophy, it also honestly worries me a bit with regard to the card's power level. As I was already saying, sacrificing everything to burn your opponent out of the game feels like a very powerful play, and I'm not sure three mana is enough of a cost for that potential. As I usually say in these cases, playtest would be needed. If this proves too much indeed, there are two solution: increasing the mana cost as needed, or adding "nonland". I'm not sure which one I would choose in a vacuum, but playtest also should indicate the best direction to take. As for this card's playability in different formats, this is certainly playable in limited, and might also be playable in constructed monored decks as a finisher as I've just explained. I don't see any specific problems in casual or multiplayer.
Creativity
(1.5/3) Uniqueness - A new twist on Fling, never done before indeed but not the best of originality.
(2/3) Flavor - Unless I'm missing something, the name and flavor text are both fine if taken each by themselves, but they appear completely disconnected from one another. Between the two, I'd keep the flavor text, which really makes a lot of sense with the mechanics, and I'd try to come up with a Urabrask-related name.
Polish
(3/3) Quality - All good.
(2/2) Main Challenge - Sacrifice, deal damage, exile. Three things.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 20.5/25
Design
(2.5/3) Appeal - Timmy loves this, as it can produce big swings in gameplay and has an amazing visual feedback. Maybe Johnny can do something with the damage ability or try recurring the enchantment. Spike just sees this as a red Wrath that goes off at his command, which is not bad at all for him.
(2.5/3) Elegance - A bit wordy, but as clear as it can be.
Development
(3/3) Viability - Everything is in color and rarity is definitely appropriate.
(2.5/3) Balance - This is certainly playable in limited and can be quite explosive there if played in the late game to break stalls. I think it may cost a bit too much for constructed, but I can't exclude this seeing some Standard play. I can't see particular problems in casual or multiplayer. Actually, this gets stronger in multiplayer, just like any effect that deals damage to "each creature".
Creativity
(2/3) Uniqueness - Dealing mass damage to creature and mass-destroying artifacts are not the most original things, but I can't remember any card that puts them together, so the end result feels somewhat original.
(3/3) Flavor - The name is fine by itself and fits well the use of the word "Seal" in Magic card names (enchantments that sacrifice themselves for free for an effect). The flavor text really makes sense with the mechanics and helps sell the name because of the established convention that Goblins are, let's say, not the smartest living beings in the Multiverse...
Polish
(3/3) Quality - All good.
(2/2) Main Challenge - Sacrifice, deal damage, destroy. Three things.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 22.5/25
shinike1729: 22.5
RickyRister: 20.5
Rhand: 19.5
RaikouRider: 19
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.)
Judging in ProgressDONEDesign -
(2/3) Appeal: Spike loves the options and efficiency here, thinking of the best way she can leverage the options to her advantage. Timmy loves X spells, especially ones that scale as insanely as this. However the XX is a minor concern. Johnny has nearly no interest in a card like this.
(0.5/3) Elegance: This is not an elegant card. A cost of XXR is already a mana cost that sacrifices elegance and adds comprehension complexity to gain versatility. This can also be aesthetically patched to some degree with cards like Fall of the Titans, having the two targets mirror the two X's etc. However with your card you continue adding X's both increasing the targets and the options, while also having 3 options to the double X's thus not having similar mirroring of 2. Even 4 options would of been better aesthetically. Figuring out what this will burn, destroy and sacrifice is an exercise in itself which can be fine for a rare (see Conjured Currency) but doesn't make for an elegant design. Finally the flavor text feels unneeded tacked on just for the requirement of the challenge, Choose cards rarely have flavor text even with the dot point templating change.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: This works within the rules of the game and the color pie. You even made sure to include "up to" on your X targets so that the cards works as intended.
(1.5/3) Balance: I'm pretty sure this card is very strong, bordering on slightly overpowered, especially with the combinations of damage and land destruction. The 4R mode of bolting two creatures and having each opponent sac two lands is a brutal standard play depending on the environment's toughness and even more so in an enviorment with playable artifacts. The land destruction finally makes this completely backbreaking in limited which is worth keeping in mind despite being a rare.
Creativity -
(2.5/3) Uniqueness: We have had modal spells with X variables like Invoke the Firemind. However we haven't had a "Choose X" spell, especially one where the effects scale on X too.
(2/3) Flavor: The flavor text is reasonably generic and doesn't help create more of a sense of the card's flavor. Wreaking Blow however is a nice name but again isn't super descriptive.
Polish -
(2.5/3) Quality: Looks good except for the unitalic "then", maybe that is deliberate but to me it looks like mistake.
(2/2) *Main Challenge: Main challenge complete
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both challenges complete
Total: 18/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Design -
(2.5/3) Appeal: Timmy isn't such a fan of sacrificing his stuff but likes the variable damage aspect, spike likewise likes the resource game of turning one resource into another, giving them plenty of choices whiles its also fairly efficient. Johnny also likes the resource change but the payoff isn't at all interesting to him. Overall it appeal to most of them but not to a massive extent.
(2/3) Elegance: The card for the most part is really elegant, not a elegant as Shrapnel Blast however, due mainly to the exile clause. However the converted mana cost while having interesting gameplay and allowing the cheap cost means its not as clean as well.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: Full marks, this card is red and viable.
(2.5/3) Balance: Theses types of cards can be difficult to evaluate power level wise, I suspect its a little on the weak side as the CMC means it is super hard to "cheat" the card outside of most older formats. But its fine if narrow.
Creativity -
(1.5/3) Uniqueness: The CMC and exile clause do a good job at differentiating this a little from the previously mentioned Shrapnel Blast, but not enough for a high uniqueness mark.
(2.5/3) Flavor: Flavor text is great, not sure why a furnace exiles however.
Polish -
(2.5/3) Quality: The quoted character for the flavor text needs to be on a new line. Otherwise fine.
(2/2) *Main Challenge: Fits the challenge.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Subchallenges complete
Total: 18.5/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Design -
(1.5/3) Appeal: Spike likes the options and the ability to get a lot of value by playing well. It isn't a big enough effect for timmy most of the time and is of little interest for johnny however.
(1/3) Elegance: "Spend only blue mana on X." is both a restrictive and inelegant line of rules text, there is a goodreason it is so rarely using in modern design. Likewise the Exile is probably not needed outside this challenge and the X spell mana being a different color is super weird. I know you want the mono color subchallenge points but I think your overall score would of been higher with simply a blue/red multicolor spell.
Development -
(2/3) Viability: Because of the color restriction of the bounce this strictly fits in the color pie however that blue mana restriction is less likely obvious to non designers and I can imagine the cries of "Since when does mono red bounce?"
(2.5/3) Balance: a RR Pyroclasm with upside is probably pushing it a tiny bit but the double restriction needed is probably fine for the most part.
Creativity -
(2.5/3) Uniqueness:While it is inelegantly stapling two base effects together it is doing it in a fun way that we haven't seen before for the most part.
(1.5/3) Flavor: The name fits really well but the flavor text is a big letdown, both not being super interesting but also not fitting the feel of magic.
Polish -
(2.5/3) Quality: The "Then," isn't required. Overwise its fine
(3/2) *Main Challenge: Yep!
(2/2) Subchallenges: Yes, even though I suspect it wasn't worth it.
Total: 18.5/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Design -
(3/3) Appeal: Spike loves the options, Timmy may find the big mana and ability to kill huge amounts of creatures exciting while Johnny wants to use the big mana to combo off and maybe do something silly with the flip side.
(0/3) Elegance: Your a brave soul, in these types of challenges Planeswalkers and DFCs are some of the highest risk cards to make. They have so many developmental knobs to tweak but leave you with inelegant looking designs without strong top down flavor to tie it together. Your card has a nice idea, a Planeswalker with only minus abilities that leaves a effect when it dies. Thats cool. However your abilities don't seem to tie together well and them all being -X loyalty makes the choices less interesting, the card harder to balance, the death less meaningful AND the card less elegant. Even the backside has the random planeswalker damage ability which is cool but yet another unnecessary element in a already overstuffed design.
Development -
(2.5/3) Viability: Rarity and color pie are fine, the BB sac ability is maybe more Red now days however. My main issue is that this design as isn't at all viable to print.
(0/3) Balance: Historically DFCs and Planeswalkers are some of the hardest cards to mentally playtest, design and evaluate. Likewise X spells and how they scale also are tipically more difficult to figure out. This combines all these difficult elements and showcases how easily it can go wrong. Now thats not a critique on you as a designer you took on one of the most challenging card types and combined it with other elements that are also super tricky so its not surprising how broken this is no matter how good you are. All the -X modes range from just strong to bonkers (the -X/-X attack mode is a one sided board wipe if you have an equal number of creatures.) Even if they kill this it makes a super powerful effect, especially if your the player is building around it.
Creativity -
(2.5/3) Uniqueness: We have had Garruk's DFC but that was very different. This is a cool new space to explore but it didn't come together in execution.
(2.5/3) Flavor: By far my favourite part of the card is the story it tells. Her abilities are unfortunately a little all over the place flavor wise with both sacrifice and exile themes etc.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Good. Even got the color indicator.
(2/2) *Main Challenge: Yup!
(2/2) Subchallenges: Flavor text on the backside checks out
Total: 17.5/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
theazurespirit: 18.5
TriceDefied: 18.5
Solesticio: 18
thenoodler: 17.5
Are you designing commons? Check out my primer on NWO.
Interested in making a custom set? Check out my Set skeleton and archetype primer.
I also write articles about getting started with custom card creation.
Go and PLAYTEST your designs, you will learn more in a single playtests than a dozen discussions.
My custom sets:
Dreamscape
Coins of Mercalis [COMPLETE]
Exodus of Zendikar - ON HOLD