(This month's banner is my own elaboration on the art of the card Rally the Peasants by Jaime Jones)
March MCC Round 4 (Finals)
"Double Trouble"
...but not Desolation Twin! The Twin's playtest name was exactly Double Trouble, but Zendikar was our last trip. We're in Innistrad now, and I hope you have no trouble in designing something double... Main Challenge: Design a DFC. (Please see clarifications.)
Subchallenges:
1- The front face does NOT share a color with the back face. (Example: Civilized Scholar/Homicidal Brute)
2- Neither face is a land or a creature.
On the Main Challenge:
• It can be any card and do anything as long as it's a DFC.
• Yes, that means this time you can also use mechanics from SOI if you want. Of course, you can still use any mechanic from original Innistrad.
Clarification: Either or both sides can be colorless for subchallenge 1, right?
Indeed, colorless is not a color so two colorless faces can't share a color if they each have none. A DFC with both colorless faces does technically pass the subchallenge, even though it fails it in spirit. But what counts is the letter of the law, so yes, it would pass.
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.
DEADLINES In green, the next deadline to come.
In blue, further future deadlines to come.
In red, past deadlines.
Player deadline: Thursday, March 31st 23:59 EDT
Judge deadline: Monday, April 4th 23:59 EDT A time extension has been asked. As soon as all judgments are final I will declare the winner.
JUDGING
Alright, submission phase is over. Judges, have at it! Every judge judges every submission. The player with the highest combined score wins the month.
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.)
Tidal Grip2UU
Enchantment — Aura [R]
Enchant creature
When Tidal Grip enters the battlefield, tap enchanted creature.
Enchanted creature doesn't untap during its controller's untap step.
Whenever enchanted creature becomes untapped, transform Tidal Grip. "On this world, the moon manipulates far more than just the tides."
—Tamiyo's Journal
//// Inexplicable Lunacy
(U) Enchantment — Aura [R]
Enchant creature
You control enchanted creature. "The lunar madness proliferates. Living beings and inanimate objects alike act in ways that reason could never predict. I fear the worst of the delusions is yet to come."
—Tamiyo's Journal
For the record, Lunacy is based on the root word Luna, which is latin for moon. So, translated literally, "lunacy" means "moon madness".
[Front Side] Blade of Resolve1
Artifact — Equipment
Equipped creature gets +1/+1.
When equipped creature dies, exile it and transform ~.
Equip 1
[Back Side] Blade of Vengeance
Artifact — Equipment
Equipped creature gets +X/+Y, where X is the power of the creature card exiled by Blade of Vengeance and Y is its toughness.
Equip 4
Plumb the Catacombs2U
Sorcery (R)
Put the top four cards of your library into your graveyard. For each creature card put into your graveyard this way, investigate.
At the beginning of your end step, if you sacrificed three or more Clues this turn, you may return Plumb the Catacombs from your graveyard to the battlefield transformed.
//// Obelisk of Madness
Artifact
At the beginning of your upkeep, reveal the top four cards of your library. Put one of them into your hand and the rest into your graveyard. "We found what we were searching for, but was it worth the price?"
Alright, submission phase is over. Judges, have at it! Every judge judges every submission. The player with the highest combined score wins the month. My review has ended and judgments are now final.
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.
Tidal Grip2UU
Enchantment — Aura [R]
Enchant creature
When Tidal Grip enters the battlefield, tap enchanted creature.
Enchanted creature doesn't untap during its controller's untap step.
Whenever enchanted creature becomes untapped, transform Tidal Grip. "On this world, the moon manipulates far more than just the tides."
—Tamiyo's Journal
//// Inexplicable Lunacy
(U) Enchantment — Aura [R]
Enchant creature
You control enchanted creature. "The lunar madness proliferates. Living beings and inanimate objects alike act in ways that reason could never predict. I fear the worst of the delusions is yet to come."
—Tamiyo's Journal
For the record, Lunacy is based on the root word Luna, which is latin for moon. So, translated literally, "lunacy" means "moon madness".
Design (1.5/3) Appeal - I can't see Timmy caring about this, actually I could easily see him hating this card when his opponent casts it on a creature of his. Johnny has the challenge of how to untap a creature that doesn't untap to gain control of it, and that challenge seems tailor-made for him. Spike sees this as psuedo-removal that very conditionally gives him control of the creature. (1/3) Elegance - The back face is very elegant, the front face not so much. It's very wordy and reading "doesn't untap" right next to "becomes untapped" feels very strange even if it's exactly the mechanical point of the card.
Development (3/3) Viability - Everything is in color and rarity is definitely right. It's been stated several times by R&D by now that nowadays all Mind Control effects are rare by default. (2.5/3) Balance - This looks fairly balanced to me. As a better Claustrophobia, it costs one more mana. As a worse (because it requires jumping through hoops) Mind Control, it costs one less mana. This is definitely playable in limited as pseudo-removal, but I honestly can't see this in constructed except in some very specific Johnny decks. I see no particular problems in casual or multiplayer.
Creativity (1/3) Uniqueness - The idea of a Claustrophobia that turns into a Mind Control is definitely new. The single effects are not though: the Grip's second and third ability (remember enchant is the first) are just the aforementioned Claustrophobia word by word. The transformation trigger is just the inspired ability word from BNG. The back face is again the aforementioned Mind Control. The combination of the effects is nice but no effect is original by itself. (3/3) Flavor - The names are good (by the way "luna" is also the Italian word for "moon", in fact the next set "Eldritch Moon" is called "Luna Spettrale" in Italian). I had to check in Gatherer if the name "Tidal Grip" was already existing. Obviously it's not, but the fact in itself that I had to check is usually a sign of a very good name. I like the flavor texts very much, even though the one on the front face barely fits on the card (with it, we're reaching ten lines total on the M15 frame, which I consider to be the bounds of microtext). They make a lot of sense for a card that's clearly supposed to be in SOI, and I also find them very well written.
Polish (3/3) Quality - All good here. (2/2) Main Challenge - Good. (1/2) Subchallenges - No lands or creatures, but the faces share a color.
Waldgeist Resonance1G
Enchantment - Aura (U)
Enchant creature
Enchanted creature gets +1/+1 for each creature card in your graveyard.
Whenever a creature you control dies, if Waldgeist Resonance is in your graveyard, you may pay 3B. If you do, return Waldgeist Resonance to the battlefield transformed.
//
Waldgeist Revenge
(B)Enchantment - Aura (U)
Enchant creature
Enchanted creature gets -1/-1 for each creature card in your graveyard. Waldgeists often take a fancy to a traveler passing through. Should their new friend meet a grisly end, the geists take it upon themselves to add the culprit to their number.
Design (2/3) Appeal - Timmy likes pumping his creatures, and the fact that this can later double as removal is just an added bonus to him, while being the main point of the card for Spike. I don't see much for Johnny here, but it may just be that not being one myself I don't see it. (2/3) Elegance - A bit on the wordy side (and in fact there's no space for flavor text on the front face), but there are many little details that help here. The connection in the card names of the two faces is one, the +1/+1 -1/-1 mirror is a very important second one, the explanation of the flavor of the transformation given by the flavor text on the back face is yet another one.
Development (3/3) Viability - What makes this card fine in the color pie is just the fact that it requires black mana for the transformation. If it weren't for that, I would have said the back face was out of the color pie for a card the requires green mana to be cast, so it's good that there is that cost. Rarity feels appropriate. (2/3) Balance - This card is definitely playable in limited, and I could easily see such a card being the BG member of the usual limited archetype uncommon cycle every large set has nowaways. I don't think this card would see constructed play though. I see no problems in casual or multiplayer.
Creativity (1/3) Uniqueness - There's nothing particularly new going on in this card. The most original thing is a twist on the classic death trigger, but it's not enough to make this card gain a lot of points here. (2.5/3) Flavor - The names are fine. I do like the fact that the double use of the word "Waldgeist" connects the two faces very well. You're right that flavor text doesn't fit on the front face. I like very much the one on the back face though, and it also gives a nice flavorful explanation of the transformation. This is not a flavor home run in my opinion, but it's still a very good shot, definitely more than good enough.
Polish (3/3) Quality - All good here. (2/2) Main Challenge - Good. (2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
[Front Side] Blade of Resolve1
Artifact — Equipment
Equipped creature gets +1/+1.
When equipped creature dies, exile it and transform ~.
Equip 1
[Back Side] Blade of Vengeance
Artifact — Equipment
Equipped creature gets +X/+Y, where X is the power of the creature card exiled by Blade of Vengeance and Y is its toughness.
Equip 4
Design (1/3) Appeal - Timmy sees this as a kind of insurance against his creatures dying: kill this one and I'll make another one even bigger. I don't see much for Johnny or Spike here. (2/3) Elegance - Short, clean, immediately understandable. Too bad for the lack of flavor text, but the mechanical elegance is there. It would have been nice to be able to judge the elegance of the flavor too.
Development (1/3) Viability - Equipment and artifacts have already done similar things many times before, so I see no problems from a color pie point of view. Rarity is missing, and I can't judge what is not there. This costs you points both here and in Quality. (1/3) Balance - I think the costs are balanced. I'm not sure I'd play this in limited, it's difficult to find a place for a noncreature spell that isn't a combat trick or a removal spell and doesn't add anything tangible to the board by itself. Let's not even talk about constructed, maybe some very particular decks, but I expect those to be exceptions, if they exist at all. At least I can't see any problem in casual or multiplayer.
Creativity (2/3) Uniqueness - There is an imprint-like quality of this card that gives it a very nice feeling of freshness though none of its effects are particularly original in and of themselves. Also, we don't get to often see +X/+Y bonuses. (1/3) Flavor - The names are fine, but a bit generic. No flavor text on any side, though there's plenly of room for it on both.
Polish (2/3) Quality - Rarity is missing. One point deducted as it's a fundamental part of a Magic card. (2/2) Main Challenge - Good. (2/2) Subchallenges - Both met. Two colorless faces can't share a color they each don't have.
Plumb the Catacombs2U
Sorcery (R)
Put the top four cards of your library into your graveyard. For each creature card put into your graveyard this way, investigate.
At the beginning of your end step, if you sacrificed three or more Clues this turn, you may return Plumb the Catacombs from your graveyard to the battlefield transformed.
//// Obelisk of Madness
Artifact
At the beginning of your upkeep, reveal the top four cards of your library. Put one of them into your hand and the rest into your graveyard. "We found what we were searching for, but was it worth the price?"
This judgment has changed since its original version. The changed parts are in italics.
Design (2/3) Appeal - Timmy does not like self-milling his own creatures even if he gets to investigate and eventually transform this into an artifact he doesn't care about either. Johnny loves this card, it can be an enabler for a lot of things. So many different things he can do! Spike likes investigating, he likes even more to draw cards, and "even even more" (if that's something you can say) not drawing random cards, but getting to choose the card he draws out of the top four. (1.5/3) Elegance - A bit on the wordy side, but the story this card tells by itself makes it feel very elegant. The back face being named after madness while having no interaction whatsoever with the mechanic madness is a huge blow to the elegance of this card though.
Development (3/3) Viability - Blue is the main color for both milling and investigate, and the Obelisk also fits just fine as card selection and drawing, that are definitely blue (remember, even if the back face is technically colorless it still needs to be something blue can do as you only get to it by spending blue mana to cast the card in the first place). The back face kind of requires this card to be rare all by itself. (2.5/3) Balance - This is certainly playable in SOI limited, especially for the NOT appropriately named Obelisk of Madness, which hasDOESN'T HAVE a very strong interaction with madness (the mechanic), unlike what you'd expect from the name. Since my original judgment, it has been pointed out to me that this card does NOT trigger madness because you're just putting cards into your graveyard, not discarding them. Cast this, sac three Clues in a turn asap, transform this, reveal the top one, draw one and trigger madness on the other three: this isWOULD HAVE BEEN a very plausible sequence that looks very strong, except madness will not be triggered, so it's just card selection, and don't misunderstand me, it's a perfectly fine card in that. I could see this getting some Standard play. I see no particular problems in casual or multiplayer.
Creativity (3/3) Uniqueness - SOI already has a sorcery DFC (Startled Awake//Persistent Nightmare), but having one that transforms into an artifact instead of a creature is definitely new design space. The use of Clues also feels very original in this card. (3/3) Flavor - The flavor is very good here. I like the name of the front face very much, while the one of the back face feels more generic but it still fits the card concept well enough. What shines here is the mechanical flavor: this card is a perfect example of how sometimes the mechanics are enough to express a card's flavor and a single line of flavor text is enough. In this card, all the single elements converge to tell a whole story. This is a wonderful job here. I'd be very curious to see this card with art, I really think that with the right art this would be one of the most memorable cards in its hypothetical set in the flavor department. Full points is the least I can give here.
Polish (2/3) Quality - Investigate is a new keyword, and as such it would certainly have reminder text here (half a point deducted). Rarity is missing on the back face. I usually deduct one point for a missing rarity, but here I'm sticking to the usual 0.5 point deduction as in this case the rarity is already indicated on the front face. Still, that doesn't justify it missing on the back face. On a real DFC, it's not like there's no expansion symbol on the back face. It's there, and it still has its right color. (2/2) Main Challenge - Good. (2/2) Subchallenges - Both met. A colorless face can't share a color it doesn't have.
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.)
Tidal Grip2UU
Enchantment — Aura [R]
Enchant creature
When Tidal Grip enters the battlefield, tap enchanted creature.
Enchanted creature doesn't untap during its controller's untap step.
Whenever enchanted creature becomes untapped, transform Tidal Grip. "On this world, the moon manipulates far more than just the tides."
—Tamiyo's Journal
//// Inexplicable Lunacy
(U) Enchantment — Aura [R]
Enchant creature
You control enchanted creature. "The lunar madness proliferates. Living beings and inanimate objects alike act in ways that reason could never predict. I fear the worst of the delusions is yet to come."
—Tamiyo's Journal
For the record, Lunacy is based on the root word Luna, which is latin for moon. So, translated literally, "lunacy" means "moon madness".
Design -
(2/3) Appeal: Johnny likes the possible combo with untapping, Spike likes the strong front removal and the possible upside. (3/3) Elegance: No issues.
Development - (3/3) Viability:Both sides are surely blue. This is good at rare and fine with the rules. (3/3) Balance: Not strictly better than Sleep Paralysis, the front side is fine. 4-mana mind controls are very powerful but the necessity of using something else to get it balances that well. As a rare I don't think this is too strong for Limited. I think it could see Standard play and would almost certainly see casual play.
Creativity - (2/3) Uniqueness: While neither face's effects are really new, the combination feels fresh. Also, as far as I could see, no card has yet triggered on the enchanted creature becoming untapped. (2.5/3) Flavor: Each side has good flavor. However the two don't work together as well as most DFCs.
Polish - (3/3) Quality: No issues I see. (2/2) *Main Challenge: This is a DFC. (1/2) Subchallenges: Neither side is a creature or land, but both sides are blue.
[Front Side] Blade of Resolve1
Artifact — Equipment
Equipped creature gets +1/+1.
When equipped creature dies, exile it and transform ~.
Equip 1
[Back Side] Blade of Vengeance
Artifact — Equipment
Equipped creature gets +X/+Y, where X is the power of the creature card exiled by Blade of Vengeance and Y is its toughness.
Equip 4
Design -
(1.5/3) Appeal: Spike might like a cheap equipment that gets big. It's possible, but not too likely, that Johnny would like the possibilities of playing with death. (3/3) Elegance: No issues here.
Development - (2/3) Viability: This is an appropriate artifact. I do wonder about the rules for this. It is possible to get two cards exiled on it with something like Brass Squire and a sac outlet. It of course will only transform once under the new DFC rules but both creatures will still be exiled. Phyrexian Ingester indicates there must be rules -surely it gets both bonuses- for this but they aren't listed on its gatherer page. Regardless, that's not to be detracted. No rarity, a point docked here and a point docked in Quality. (2/3) Balance: In Limited it's a decent equipment that gives additional value off equipped creature dying. In colors that don't care about the graveyard, so I could see it in the lower slots. It's probably a bit too weak for constructed. I don't know that +X/+Y is enough that too many casual decks would play it.
Creativity - (2/3) Uniqueness: Phyrexian Ingester has done the +X/+Y based on exile thing before, but nothing else has. Flipping on the equipped creature's death is new. (1/3) Flavor: Good name on the back, but the lack of flavor text when there's room weakens it all significantly.
Polish - (2/3) Quality: Rarity! (2/2) *Main Challenge: This is a DFC (2/2) Subchallenges: Neither side shares a color with the other or is a land or creature.
Plumb the Catacombs2U
Sorcery (R)
Put the top four cards of your library into your graveyard. For each creature card put into your graveyard this way, investigate.
At the beginning of your end step, if you sacrificed three or more Clues this turn, you may return Plumb the Catacombs from your graveyard to the battlefield transformed.
//// Obelisk of Madness
Artifact
At the beginning of your upkeep, reveal the top four cards of your library. Put one of them into your hand and the rest into your graveyard. "We found what we were searching for, but was it worth the price?"
Design -
(1/3) Appeal: This is too much maneuvering for too little payoff for Spike and Timmy. Johnny might like that interplay, and the card advantage can help find the combo. (2/3) Elegance: I think this would take a reread or two, simply because there's a lot of text with a lot of not necessarily intuitive words that could be other words. "creature" cards, "your" end step, "reveal" the top "4". It's likely the best possible for this effect, but it's still inelegant.
Development - (3/3) Viability: This is fine in blue, and at rare. No rules issues. (2/3) Balance: Without any context this would be a fine power level, perhaps slightly strong but far from too strong. With context it's rather weird to determine the balance of. What blue decks play enough creatures for this to be worth it? What decks want to sacrifice clues on their turn? Why do you reveal the cards rather than simply looking at them? This would see play in decks like SOI's UG archetype in limited, but I'm not sure, for the above reasons, that it would see any constructed play. Any deck that wanted it would be much better off for it, but I'm not sure any would.
Creativity - (2/3) Uniqueness: A sorcery that flips into an artifact is new. Coerced Confession does a similar thing to the primary effect of the front. Briarbridge Patrol has the trigger already, and the back face does nothing unique. Overall feels pretty fresh. (2.5/3) Flavor: The front face has good flavor despite the lack of flavor text. The back's flavor text, name, and effect work fine together. I'm just wondering why there's an obelisk in the sewers.
Polish - (3/3) Quality: No issues here. (2/2) *Main Challenge: This is a DFC (2/2) Subchallenges: Neither side shares a color with the other or is a land or creature.
Waldgeist Resonance1G
Enchantment - Aura (U)
Enchant creature
Enchanted creature gets +1/+1 for each creature card in your graveyard.
Whenever a creature you control dies, if Waldgeist Resonance is in your graveyard, you may pay 3B. If you do, return Waldgeist Resonance to the battlefield transformed.
//
Waldgeist Revenge
(B)Enchantment - Aura (U)
Enchant creature
Enchanted creature gets -1/-1 for each creature card in your graveyard. Waldgeists often take a fancy to a traveler passing through. Should their new friend meet a grisly end, the geists take it upon themselves to add the culprit to their number.
Design -
(2/3) Appeal: Spike likes pumping and removal, Johnny might like this as a secondary reward in deck that gets lots of creatures into the yard. (3/3) Elegance: No issues here.
Development - (3/3) Viability: Requiring black for the back makes it fine, and the front is good in green. Complexity-wise, this is ok at uncommon. (1.5/3) Balance: Repeatable removal for 4 isn't ok at uncommon in Limited. While it does require a bit of setup, that setup is incidental, and it serves a purpose in the meantime. This is good for Standard and there's a small chance of it seeing Modern play.
Creativity - (1/3) Uniqueness: The way it acts as its own inverse, while flavorfully the DFC standard, is mechanically quite fresh. Neither side's actual effect is new however, nor is the trigger. (3/3) Flavor: The flavor text draws together the initially unclear flavor very well.
Polish - (3/3) Quality: No issues here. (2/2) *Main Challenge: This is a DFC (2/2) Subchallenges: Neither side shares a colr with the other or is a creature or land.
(2/3) Appeal: Johnny will find a combo for this. Spike would play it in limited.
(3/3) Elegance: No problems here.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: No problems here.
(3/3) Balance: Four mana seems reasonable for this. Find a way to untap it and it's yours. I have nothing to complain about.
Creativity -
(2/3) Uniqueness: The effects on each side have been done before, but the combination is new..
(3/3) Flavor: No problems here.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: No problems here.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met.
(1/2) Subchallenges: Both sides are the same colour.
Total: 22/25
Design -
(1/3) Appeal: Johnny might find a use for this.
(2/3) Elegance: Nothing here explains why this exiles the equipped creature.
Development -
(2/3) Viability: Rarity missing.
(2/3) Balance: Unless the equipped creature was a 1/1, this would be a good card.
Creativity -
(3/3) Uniqueness: While there is an Equipment card in Shadows over Innistrad that transforms, it is different enough from this card.
(1/3) Flavor: Some flavour text would have been nice. I feel the name on the front side does not fit.
Polish -
(2/3) Quality: Rarity missing.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met.
Total: 17/25
Design -
(1/3) Appeal: Johnny would like this.
(3/3) Elegance: No problems here.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: No problems here.
(2/3) Balance: You can certainly go through your deck fast with this. You can get up to four Clues with this, which can help you transform this card (though Tamiyo's Journal can make this easier.
Creativity -
(2/3) Uniqueness: Front side's new. Back side is sort of like Browse each upkeep.
(3/3) Flavor: No problems here.
Polish -
(1/3) Quality: Rarity should be posted on both sides. There should be flavour text for investigate.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met.
Total: 19/25
Design -
(2/3) Appeal: Timmy like the pump side, while Spike likes the killing side.
(3/3) Elegance: No problems here.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: No problems here.
(3/3) Balance: Casting cost is okay. Four mana seems reasonable for recurring creature killing.
Creativity -
(1/3) Uniqueness: Nothing here that's particularly new.
(3/3) Flavor: As I understand it, “Waldgeist” is German for “Forest Spirit,” so it's a good name for this.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: No problems here.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met.
Design -
(2/3) Appeal: Johnny would probably think about putting it in a deck that already features untapping. Spike is happy about that reasonable removal he's getting passed in the draft. Nothing exciting though.
(2/3) Elegance: This will just make people go "What? How does it untap?" Not everyone is familiar with the concept of going out of your way to make something like that happen.
Development -
(2/3) Viability: Obviously very blue. One one hand it's on the level of a common removal like Claustrophobia. On the other hand you don't want funky effects like that appear at common. I feel like uncommon would have been more appropriate.
(1/3) Balance: The fact that it's worse than Claustrophobia when you can't flip it is really going to make for a lot of disapointed booster pack rippers. You really gotta play a specific subset of cards to get this to work out and the reward isn't that great.
Creativity -
(2.5/3) Uniqueness: It does combine basic effects we see often to form something new, I like that.
(3/3) Flavor: Very fitting names and great flavortexts.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Looks good.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Looks like a DFC to me and it certainly works best as one.
(1/2) Subchallenges: No lands or creatures, but sharing a color.
Total: 18.5/25
Design -
(3/3) Appeal: Timmy gets really excited. Spike might just agree, as it does pose quite the valuable threat.
(2.5/3) Elegance: X/Y reads funky, but the card is quite simple. It's weird how Blade of Resolve exiles the card, but Blade of Vengeance specifically asks about it's own side for the exiled card.
I know it's correct within the rules, but it might raise an eyebrow here and there. But most players probably wouldn't even notice it, as it's very straightforward.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: Looks like something an equipment is meant to do. Sadly you forgot to put a rarity indicator, I'm assuming this would have been at rare. I'm not going to deduct points here, rather have it in quality.
(3/3) Balance: 1cmc/1eq for +1/+1 isn't even good, so getting a big effect like that is good. 4 mana equip makes this a choice instead of just something that happens. Good balance.
Creativity -
(2.5/3) Uniqueness: Phyrexian Ingester somewhat went there, but your take makes so much sense, I wonder why it's not a card yet.
(1/3) Flavor: A vengeance theme is certainly going on. But it feels more like it's the essence of the wielder haunting the blade. So that would have been a better way to go I think. Could have elaborated on the idea in a flavortext.
Polish -
(2/3) Quality: Looks good, but missing that rarity symbol.
(2/2) Main Challenge: DFC
(2/2) Subchallenges: Colorless Artifacts.
Total: 21/25
Design -
(2.5/3) Appeal: Pretty sure Timmy wouldn't want to mill his precious creatures. Spike sees the potential, but mostly Johnny would try to actually get there.
(1.5/3) Elegance: It's weird how the sorcery does it's one time thing and then sits in the graveyard. Waiting. Plotting. Feels like it should be an ongoing search, like the Zendikar quests. Only rewarding you with the Obelisk on your own turn looks like a pitfall trap quite some player might fall into. Sadness.
Development -
(2/3) Viability: Prone to be forgotten in the graveyard. Good rarity, correct colors. Not sure why it's revealing the cards, really doesn't have to.
(2/3) Balance: Rather weak on the frontside for a rare. It really starts to shine on the flipside though. Looks fun to play. Again, having to spend 6 mana on your own turn is a huge price to pay, probably plays a lot better when you can just do it eot on your opponents turn.
Creativity -
(2/3) Uniqueness: Briarbridge Patrol taps into the design space. The card does feel different enough though.
(3/3) Flavor: I like the idea of questing with clues. A great application. Not sure what to think about finding more and more quests with the Obelisk, but that's a minor concern.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Looks good.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Good use of a DFC.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met.
Total: 20/25
Design -
(3/3) Appeal: This somewhat falls into Timmy territory. But it's build-around, so Johnny might be interested. It also fixes the 2 for 1 problem many auras face, so Spike is also interested. Incredible job there.
(1/3) Elegance: The main effects are simple enough. There's this mirrored effect that makes it flow. The transform trigger is awfully complex though. I had to look up the rules to see if an aura "sees" the thing it enchants dying from the graveyard, but they do not, they enter the graveyard after the enchanted permanent. So that's super confusing, as you'd expect this to trigger off it's enchanted creature.
Development -
(2/3) Viability: Uncommon seems like a good fit as this is a draft around me two color card. Colors are appropriate, even though green is secondary on that effect. Having something in your graveyard that triggers every time a creature dies is problematic as you have to keep track.
(1.5/3) Balance: I liked this card a lot. Then I realized you can just return it over and over again, as it returns to your graveyard when the enchanted creature dies from the transformed part. That's insane, as every creature you control becomes a removal. This might just be too strong for an uncommon. Sure, it's 4 mana, but repeated removal is worth that much. The value this card holds is just too much.
Creativity -
(3/3) Uniqueness: Looks new to me. Very original card.
(2.5/3) Flavor: Not triggering off the creature the Waldgeist took a liking to makes it a bit of a flavorfail. Other than that I love concept, names and flavortext.
Polish -
(2.5/3) Quality: As Accursed Witch shows you need to add a clause for what the returning card attaches to.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Very good use of a DFC.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Different colors, a good solution for the task, too. Enchantments.
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
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.
(This month's banner is my own elaboration on the art of the card Rally the Peasants by Jaime Jones)
March MCC Round 4 (Finals)
"Double Trouble"
...but not Desolation Twin! The Twin's playtest name was exactly Double Trouble, but Zendikar was our last trip. We're in Innistrad now, and I hope you have no trouble in designing something double...
Main Challenge: Design a DFC. (Please see clarifications.)
Subchallenges:
1- The front face does NOT share a color with the back face. (Example: Civilized Scholar/Homicidal Brute)
2- Neither face is a land or a creature.
On the Main Challenge:
• It can be any card and do anything as long as it's a DFC.
• Yes, that means this time you can also use mechanics from SOI if you want. Of course, you can still use any mechanic from original Innistrad.
Indeed, colorless is not a color so two colorless faces can't share a color if they each have none. A DFC with both colorless faces does technically pass the subchallenge, even though it fails it in spirit. But what counts is the letter of the law, so yes, it would pass.
(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.
DEADLINES
In green, the next deadline to come.
In blue, further future deadlines to come.
In red, past deadlines.
Player deadline: Thursday, March 31st 23:59 EDT
Judge deadline:
Monday, April 4th 23:59 EDTA time extension has been asked. As soon as all judgments are final I will declare the winner.JUDGES
bravelion83
Moss_Elemental
doomfish
caliburdeath
PLAYERS
admirableadmiral
mirrorentity
shinike1729
theazurespirit
JUDGING
Alright, submission phase is over. Judges, have at it! Every judge judges every submission. The player with the highest combined score wins the month.
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.)
Enchantment — Aura [R]
Enchant creature
When Tidal Grip enters the battlefield, tap enchanted creature.
Enchanted creature doesn't untap during its controller's untap step.
Whenever enchanted creature becomes untapped, transform Tidal Grip.
"On this world, the moon manipulates far more than just the tides."
—Tamiyo's Journal
////
Inexplicable Lunacy
(U) Enchantment — Aura [R]
Enchant creature
You control enchanted creature.
"The lunar madness proliferates. Living beings and inanimate objects alike act in ways that reason could never predict. I fear the worst of the delusions is yet to come."
—Tamiyo's Journal
For the record, Lunacy is based on the root word Luna, which is latin for moon. So, translated literally, "lunacy" means "moon madness".
Blade of Resolve 1
Artifact — Equipment
Equipped creature gets +1/+1.
When equipped creature dies, exile it and transform ~.
Equip 1
[Back Side]
Blade of Vengeance
Artifact — Equipment
Equipped creature gets +X/+Y, where X is the power of the creature card exiled by Blade of Vengeance and Y is its toughness.
Equip 4
Sorcery (R)
Put the top four cards of your library into your graveyard. For each creature card put into your graveyard this way, investigate.
At the beginning of your end step, if you sacrificed three or more Clues this turn, you may return Plumb the Catacombs from your graveyard to the battlefield transformed.
////
Obelisk of Madness
Artifact
At the beginning of your upkeep, reveal the top four cards of your library. Put one of them into your hand and the rest into your graveyard.
"We found what we were searching for, but was it worth the price?"
My review has ended and judgments are now final.
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.
Design
(1.5/3) Appeal - I can't see Timmy caring about this, actually I could easily see him hating this card when his opponent casts it on a creature of his. Johnny has the challenge of how to untap a creature that doesn't untap to gain control of it, and that challenge seems tailor-made for him. Spike sees this as psuedo-removal that very conditionally gives him control of the creature.
(1/3) Elegance - The back face is very elegant, the front face not so much. It's very wordy and reading "doesn't untap" right next to "becomes untapped" feels very strange even if it's exactly the mechanical point of the card.
Development
(3/3) Viability - Everything is in color and rarity is definitely right. It's been stated several times by R&D by now that nowadays all Mind Control effects are rare by default.
(2.5/3) Balance - This looks fairly balanced to me. As a better Claustrophobia, it costs one more mana. As a worse (because it requires jumping through hoops) Mind Control, it costs one less mana. This is definitely playable in limited as pseudo-removal, but I honestly can't see this in constructed except in some very specific Johnny decks. I see no particular problems in casual or multiplayer.
Creativity
(1/3) Uniqueness - The idea of a Claustrophobia that turns into a Mind Control is definitely new. The single effects are not though: the Grip's second and third ability (remember enchant is the first) are just the aforementioned Claustrophobia word by word. The transformation trigger is just the inspired ability word from BNG. The back face is again the aforementioned Mind Control. The combination of the effects is nice but no effect is original by itself.
(3/3) Flavor - The names are good (by the way "luna" is also the Italian word for "moon", in fact the next set "Eldritch Moon" is called "Luna Spettrale" in Italian). I had to check in Gatherer if the name "Tidal Grip" was already existing. Obviously it's not, but the fact in itself that I had to check is usually a sign of a very good name. I like the flavor texts very much, even though the one on the front face barely fits on the card (with it, we're reaching ten lines total on the M15 frame, which I consider to be the bounds of microtext). They make a lot of sense for a card that's clearly supposed to be in SOI, and I also find them very well written.
Polish
(3/3) Quality - All good here.
(2/2) Main Challenge - Good.
(1/2) Subchallenges - No lands or creatures, but the faces share a color.
Total: 18/25
Design
(2/3) Appeal - Timmy likes pumping his creatures, and the fact that this can later double as removal is just an added bonus to him, while being the main point of the card for Spike. I don't see much for Johnny here, but it may just be that not being one myself I don't see it.
(2/3) Elegance - A bit on the wordy side (and in fact there's no space for flavor text on the front face), but there are many little details that help here. The connection in the card names of the two faces is one, the +1/+1 -1/-1 mirror is a very important second one, the explanation of the flavor of the transformation given by the flavor text on the back face is yet another one.
Development
(3/3) Viability - What makes this card fine in the color pie is just the fact that it requires black mana for the transformation. If it weren't for that, I would have said the back face was out of the color pie for a card the requires green mana to be cast, so it's good that there is that cost. Rarity feels appropriate.
(2/3) Balance - This card is definitely playable in limited, and I could easily see such a card being the BG member of the usual limited archetype uncommon cycle every large set has nowaways. I don't think this card would see constructed play though. I see no problems in casual or multiplayer.
Creativity
(1/3) Uniqueness - There's nothing particularly new going on in this card. The most original thing is a twist on the classic death trigger, but it's not enough to make this card gain a lot of points here.
(2.5/3) Flavor - The names are fine. I do like the fact that the double use of the word "Waldgeist" connects the two faces very well. You're right that flavor text doesn't fit on the front face. I like very much the one on the back face though, and it also gives a nice flavorful explanation of the transformation. This is not a flavor home run in my opinion, but it's still a very good shot, definitely more than good enough.
Polish
(3/3) Quality - All good here.
(2/2) Main Challenge - Good.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 19.5/25
Design
(1/3) Appeal - Timmy sees this as a kind of insurance against his creatures dying: kill this one and I'll make another one even bigger. I don't see much for Johnny or Spike here.
(2/3) Elegance - Short, clean, immediately understandable. Too bad for the lack of flavor text, but the mechanical elegance is there. It would have been nice to be able to judge the elegance of the flavor too.
Development
(1/3) Viability - Equipment and artifacts have already done similar things many times before, so I see no problems from a color pie point of view. Rarity is missing, and I can't judge what is not there. This costs you points both here and in Quality.
(1/3) Balance - I think the costs are balanced. I'm not sure I'd play this in limited, it's difficult to find a place for a noncreature spell that isn't a combat trick or a removal spell and doesn't add anything tangible to the board by itself. Let's not even talk about constructed, maybe some very particular decks, but I expect those to be exceptions, if they exist at all. At least I can't see any problem in casual or multiplayer.
Creativity
(2/3) Uniqueness - There is an imprint-like quality of this card that gives it a very nice feeling of freshness though none of its effects are particularly original in and of themselves. Also, we don't get to often see +X/+Y bonuses.
(1/3) Flavor - The names are fine, but a bit generic. No flavor text on any side, though there's plenly of room for it on both.
Polish
(2/3) Quality - Rarity is missing. One point deducted as it's a fundamental part of a Magic card.
(2/2) Main Challenge - Good.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met. Two colorless faces can't share a color they each don't have.
Total: 14/25
This judgment has changed since its original version. The changed parts are in italics.
Design
(2/3) Appeal - Timmy does not like self-milling his own creatures even if he gets to investigate and eventually transform this into an artifact he doesn't care about either. Johnny loves this card, it can be an enabler for a lot of things. So many different things he can do! Spike likes investigating, he likes even more to draw cards, and "even even more" (if that's something you can say) not drawing random cards, but getting to choose the card he draws out of the top four.
(1.5/3) Elegance - A bit on the wordy side, but the story this card tells by itself makes it feel very elegant. The back face being named after madness while having no interaction whatsoever with the mechanic madness is a huge blow to the elegance of this card though.
Development
(3/3) Viability - Blue is the main color for both milling and investigate, and the Obelisk also fits just fine as card selection and drawing, that are definitely blue (remember, even if the back face is technically colorless it still needs to be something blue can do as you only get to it by spending blue mana to cast the card in the first place). The back face kind of requires this card to be rare all by itself.
(2.5/3) Balance - This is certainly playable in SOI limited, especially for the NOT appropriately named Obelisk of Madness, which
hasDOESN'T HAVE a very strong interaction with madness (the mechanic), unlike what you'd expect from the name. Since my original judgment, it has been pointed out to me that this card does NOT trigger madness because you're just putting cards into your graveyard, not discarding them. Cast this, sac three Clues in a turn asap, transform this, reveal the top one, draw one and trigger madness on the other three: thisisWOULD HAVE BEEN a very plausible sequence that looks very strong, except madness will not be triggered, so it's just card selection, and don't misunderstand me, it's a perfectly fine card in that. I could see this getting some Standard play. I see no particular problems in casual or multiplayer.Creativity
(3/3) Uniqueness - SOI already has a sorcery DFC (Startled Awake//Persistent Nightmare), but having one that transforms into an artifact instead of a creature is definitely new design space. The use of Clues also feels very original in this card.
(3/3) Flavor - The flavor is very good here. I like the name of the front face very much, while the one of the back face feels more generic but it still fits the card concept well enough. What shines here is the mechanical flavor: this card is a perfect example of how sometimes the mechanics are enough to express a card's flavor and a single line of flavor text is enough. In this card, all the single elements converge to tell a whole story. This is a wonderful job here. I'd be very curious to see this card with art, I really think that with the right art this would be one of the most memorable cards in its hypothetical set in the flavor department. Full points is the least I can give here.
Polish
(2/3) Quality - Investigate is a new keyword, and as such it would certainly have reminder text here (half a point deducted). Rarity is missing on the back face. I usually deduct one point for a missing rarity, but here I'm sticking to the usual 0.5 point deduction as in this case the rarity is already indicated on the front face. Still, that doesn't justify it missing on the back face. On a real DFC, it's not like there's no expansion symbol on the back face. It's there, and it still has its right color.
(2/2) Main Challenge - Good.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met. A colorless face can't share a color it doesn't have.
Total: 21/25
theazurespirit: 21
admirableadmiral: 18
mirrorentity: 19.5
shinike1729: 14
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.)
Design -
(2/3) Appeal: Johnny likes the possible combo with untapping, Spike likes the strong front removal and the possible upside.
(3/3) Elegance: No issues.
Development -
(3/3) Viability:Both sides are surely blue. This is good at rare and fine with the rules.
(3/3) Balance: Not strictly better than Sleep Paralysis, the front side is fine. 4-mana mind controls are very powerful but the necessity of using something else to get it balances that well. As a rare I don't think this is too strong for Limited. I think it could see Standard play and would almost certainly see casual play.
Creativity -
(2/3) Uniqueness: While neither face's effects are really new, the combination feels fresh. Also, as far as I could see, no card has yet triggered on the enchanted creature becoming untapped.
(2.5/3) Flavor: Each side has good flavor. However the two don't work together as well as most DFCs.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: No issues I see.
(2/2) *Main Challenge: This is a DFC.
(1/2) Subchallenges: Neither side is a creature or land, but both sides are blue.
Total: 21.5/25
(1.5/3) Appeal: Spike might like a cheap equipment that gets big. It's possible, but not too likely, that Johnny would like the possibilities of playing with death.
(3/3) Elegance: No issues here.
Development -
(2/3) Viability: This is an appropriate artifact. I do wonder about the rules for this. It is possible to get two cards exiled on it with something like Brass Squire and a sac outlet. It of course will only transform once under the new DFC rules but both creatures will still be exiled. Phyrexian Ingester indicates there must be rules -surely it gets both bonuses- for this but they aren't listed on its gatherer page. Regardless, that's not to be detracted. No rarity, a point docked here and a point docked in Quality.
(2/3) Balance: In Limited it's a decent equipment that gives additional value off equipped creature dying. In colors that don't care about the graveyard, so I could see it in the lower slots. It's probably a bit too weak for constructed. I don't know that +X/+Y is enough that too many casual decks would play it.
Creativity -
(2/3) Uniqueness: Phyrexian Ingester has done the +X/+Y based on exile thing before, but nothing else has. Flipping on the equipped creature's death is new.
(1/3) Flavor: Good name on the back, but the lack of flavor text when there's room weakens it all significantly.
Polish -
(2/3) Quality: Rarity!
(2/2) *Main Challenge: This is a DFC
(2/2) Subchallenges: Neither side shares a color with the other or is a land or creature.
Total: 17.5/25
(1/3) Appeal: This is too much maneuvering for too little payoff for Spike and Timmy. Johnny might like that interplay, and the card advantage can help find the combo.
(2/3) Elegance: I think this would take a reread or two, simply because there's a lot of text with a lot of not necessarily intuitive words that could be other words. "creature" cards, "your" end step, "reveal" the top "4". It's likely the best possible for this effect, but it's still inelegant.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: This is fine in blue, and at rare. No rules issues.
(2/3) Balance: Without any context this would be a fine power level, perhaps slightly strong but far from too strong. With context it's rather weird to determine the balance of. What blue decks play enough creatures for this to be worth it? What decks want to sacrifice clues on their turn? Why do you reveal the cards rather than simply looking at them? This would see play in decks like SOI's UG archetype in limited, but I'm not sure, for the above reasons, that it would see any constructed play. Any deck that wanted it would be much better off for it, but I'm not sure any would.
Creativity -
(2/3) Uniqueness: A sorcery that flips into an artifact is new. Coerced Confession does a similar thing to the primary effect of the front. Briarbridge Patrol has the trigger already, and the back face does nothing unique. Overall feels pretty fresh.
(2.5/3) Flavor: The front face has good flavor despite the lack of flavor text. The back's flavor text, name, and effect work fine together. I'm just wondering why there's an obelisk in the sewers.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: No issues here.
(2/2) *Main Challenge: This is a DFC
(2/2) Subchallenges: Neither side shares a color with the other or is a land or creature.
Total: 19.5/25
(2/3) Appeal: Spike likes pumping and removal, Johnny might like this as a secondary reward in deck that gets lots of creatures into the yard.
(3/3) Elegance: No issues here.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: Requiring black for the back makes it fine, and the front is good in green. Complexity-wise, this is ok at uncommon.
(1.5/3) Balance: Repeatable removal for 4 isn't ok at uncommon in Limited. While it does require a bit of setup, that setup is incidental, and it serves a purpose in the meantime. This is good for Standard and there's a small chance of it seeing Modern play.
Creativity -
(1/3) Uniqueness: The way it acts as its own inverse, while flavorfully the DFC standard, is mechanically quite fresh. Neither side's actual effect is new however, nor is the trigger.
(3/3) Flavor: The flavor text draws together the initially unclear flavor very well.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: No issues here.
(2/2) *Main Challenge: This is a DFC
(2/2) Subchallenges: Neither side shares a colr with the other or is a creature or land.
Total: 20.5/25
mirrorentity: 20.5
shinike1729: 17.5
theazurespirit: 19.5
(2/3) Appeal: Johnny will find a combo for this. Spike would play it in limited.
(3/3) Elegance: No problems here.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: No problems here.
(3/3) Balance: Four mana seems reasonable for this. Find a way to untap it and it's yours. I have nothing to complain about.
Creativity -
(2/3) Uniqueness: The effects on each side have been done before, but the combination is new..
(3/3) Flavor: No problems here.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: No problems here.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met.
(1/2) Subchallenges: Both sides are the same colour.
Total: 22/25
(1/3) Appeal: Johnny might find a use for this.
(2/3) Elegance: Nothing here explains why this exiles the equipped creature.
Development -
(2/3) Viability: Rarity missing.
(2/3) Balance: Unless the equipped creature was a 1/1, this would be a good card.
Creativity -
(3/3) Uniqueness: While there is an Equipment card in Shadows over Innistrad that transforms, it is different enough from this card.
(1/3) Flavor: Some flavour text would have been nice. I feel the name on the front side does not fit.
Polish -
(2/3) Quality: Rarity missing.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met.
Total: 17/25
(1/3) Appeal: Johnny would like this.
(3/3) Elegance: No problems here.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: No problems here.
(2/3) Balance: You can certainly go through your deck fast with this. You can get up to four Clues with this, which can help you transform this card (though Tamiyo's Journal can make this easier.
Creativity -
(2/3) Uniqueness: Front side's new. Back side is sort of like Browse each upkeep.
(3/3) Flavor: No problems here.
Polish -
(1/3) Quality: Rarity should be posted on both sides. There should be flavour text for investigate.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met.
Total: 19/25
(2/3) Appeal: Timmy like the pump side, while Spike likes the killing side.
(3/3) Elegance: No problems here.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: No problems here.
(3/3) Balance: Casting cost is okay. Four mana seems reasonable for recurring creature killing.
Creativity -
(1/3) Uniqueness: Nothing here that's particularly new.
(3/3) Flavor: As I understand it, “Waldgeist” is German for “Forest Spirit,” so it's a good name for this.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: No problems here.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met.
Total: 22/25
As always, no complaints, please.
(2/3) Appeal: Johnny would probably think about putting it in a deck that already features untapping. Spike is happy about that reasonable removal he's getting passed in the draft. Nothing exciting though.
(2/3) Elegance: This will just make people go "What? How does it untap?" Not everyone is familiar with the concept of going out of your way to make something like that happen.
Development -
(2/3) Viability: Obviously very blue. One one hand it's on the level of a common removal like Claustrophobia. On the other hand you don't want funky effects like that appear at common. I feel like uncommon would have been more appropriate.
(1/3) Balance: The fact that it's worse than Claustrophobia when you can't flip it is really going to make for a lot of disapointed booster pack rippers. You really gotta play a specific subset of cards to get this to work out and the reward isn't that great.
Creativity -
(2.5/3) Uniqueness: It does combine basic effects we see often to form something new, I like that.
(3/3) Flavor: Very fitting names and great flavortexts.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Looks good.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Looks like a DFC to me and it certainly works best as one.
(1/2) Subchallenges: No lands or creatures, but sharing a color.
Total: 18.5/25
(3/3) Appeal: Timmy gets really excited. Spike might just agree, as it does pose quite the valuable threat.
(2.5/3) Elegance: X/Y reads funky, but the card is quite simple. It's weird how Blade of Resolve exiles the card, but Blade of Vengeance specifically asks about it's own side for the exiled card.
I know it's correct within the rules, but it might raise an eyebrow here and there. But most players probably wouldn't even notice it, as it's very straightforward.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: Looks like something an equipment is meant to do. Sadly you forgot to put a rarity indicator, I'm assuming this would have been at rare. I'm not going to deduct points here, rather have it in quality.
(3/3) Balance: 1cmc/1eq for +1/+1 isn't even good, so getting a big effect like that is good. 4 mana equip makes this a choice instead of just something that happens. Good balance.
Creativity -
(2.5/3) Uniqueness: Phyrexian Ingester somewhat went there, but your take makes so much sense, I wonder why it's not a card yet.
(1/3) Flavor: A vengeance theme is certainly going on. But it feels more like it's the essence of the wielder haunting the blade. So that would have been a better way to go I think. Could have elaborated on the idea in a flavortext.
Polish -
(2/3) Quality: Looks good, but missing that rarity symbol.
(2/2) Main Challenge: DFC
(2/2) Subchallenges: Colorless Artifacts.
Total: 21/25
(2.5/3) Appeal: Pretty sure Timmy wouldn't want to mill his precious creatures. Spike sees the potential, but mostly Johnny would try to actually get there.
(1.5/3) Elegance: It's weird how the sorcery does it's one time thing and then sits in the graveyard. Waiting. Plotting. Feels like it should be an ongoing search, like the Zendikar quests. Only rewarding you with the Obelisk on your own turn looks like a pitfall trap quite some player might fall into. Sadness.
Development -
(2/3) Viability: Prone to be forgotten in the graveyard. Good rarity, correct colors. Not sure why it's revealing the cards, really doesn't have to.
(2/3) Balance: Rather weak on the frontside for a rare. It really starts to shine on the flipside though. Looks fun to play. Again, having to spend 6 mana on your own turn is a huge price to pay, probably plays a lot better when you can just do it eot on your opponents turn.
Creativity -
(2/3) Uniqueness: Briarbridge Patrol taps into the design space. The card does feel different enough though.
(3/3) Flavor: I like the idea of questing with clues. A great application. Not sure what to think about finding more and more quests with the Obelisk, but that's a minor concern.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Looks good.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Good use of a DFC.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met.
Total: 20/25
(3/3) Appeal: This somewhat falls into Timmy territory. But it's build-around, so Johnny might be interested. It also fixes the 2 for 1 problem many auras face, so Spike is also interested. Incredible job there.
(1/3) Elegance: The main effects are simple enough. There's this mirrored effect that makes it flow. The transform trigger is awfully complex though. I had to look up the rules to see if an aura "sees" the thing it enchants dying from the graveyard, but they do not, they enter the graveyard after the enchanted permanent. So that's super confusing, as you'd expect this to trigger off it's enchanted creature.
Development -
(2/3) Viability: Uncommon seems like a good fit as this is a draft around me two color card. Colors are appropriate, even though green is secondary on that effect. Having something in your graveyard that triggers every time a creature dies is problematic as you have to keep track.
(1.5/3) Balance: I liked this card a lot. Then I realized you can just return it over and over again, as it returns to your graveyard when the enchanted creature dies from the transformed part. That's insane, as every creature you control becomes a removal. This might just be too strong for an uncommon. Sure, it's 4 mana, but repeated removal is worth that much. The value this card holds is just too much.
Creativity -
(3/3) Uniqueness: Looks new to me. Very original card.
(2.5/3) Flavor: Not triggering off the creature the Waldgeist took a liking to makes it a bit of a flavorfail. Other than that I love concept, names and flavortext.
Polish -
(2.5/3) Quality: As Accursed Witch shows you need to add a clause for what the returning card attaches to.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Very good use of a DFC.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Different colors, a good solution for the task, too. Enchantments.
Total: 19.5/25
20 theazurespirit
19.5 mirrorentity
18.5 admirableadmiral
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
mirrorentity
Congratulations to him/her and thanks to everyone who played or judged this month!
The final results are as follows.
mirrorentity: 19.5 + 22 + 19.5 + 20.5 = 81.5
admirableadmiral: 18 + 22 + 18.5 + 21.5 = 80
theazurespirit: 21 + 19 + 20 + 19.5 = 79.5
shinike1729: 14 + 17 + 21 + 17.5 = 69.5
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.)