Dreams Come True - With eldritch horrors comes madness. With madness.. vivid hallucinations. Dreams if you so will. Dreams roaming freely.
Legendary dreams. As old as the desires in each and every Magic player. Desire for certain creature types to get their own legendary sometime.
Flawless transition, this months theme is saved.
Main Challenge: Design a legendary Bear, Spider, Wall, Boar, Homunculus or Squirrel. Subchallenge 1: It's a mythic rare. Subchallenge 2: Does not mention its own creature type in the card text.
Main: OR. I don't want no bear spiders please!
Sub1: The orange symbol. You know, the one that gives you a free ticket on powerlevel?
Sub2: Yes, bear can care about spider, but not about other bear. No tribal. If it's part of a name it's fine, just not as a functional creature type reference.
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? An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification. (X/2) Subchallenges: One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Total: X/25
DEADLINES
Player deadline: Sunday, May 22th 2016
Judge deadline: Wednesday, May 25th 2016
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
Lord Culstath's Wall
Legendary Creature — Wall (M)
Defender, hexproof, reach
Each creature you control with defender assigns combat damage equal to its toughness rather than its power.
Other creatures you control with defender may attack as though they didn't have defender. "Send them all. Defense of the kingdom is no longer a concern."
0/5
(22 Total) - October 2014; December 2014; January 2015; April 2015; June 2015; August 2015; September 2015; November 2015; December 2015(T); January 2016; March 2016(T); April 2016; June 2016; October 2016; December 2016(T); February 2017; April 2017; December 2017; November 2018(T); January 2019; April 2019; June 2019
(8 Total) - May 2015; May 2016; June 2016; August 2016; October 2016; December 2016; October 2017; May 2019
(7 Total) - September 2015; October 2015; January 2016; March 2016; April 2016; July 2016(T); March 2019(T)
Gorthur, Ferocity of the Wood4GG
Legendary Creature - Bear (M)
Whenever a creature enters the battlefield under an opponent's control, it fights Gorthur, Ferocity of the Wood. "We sentence you to exile in Gorthur's Wood."
- Grimanco Tribunal death sentence
6/4
Sursei, Savagery Unbound3UGR
Legendary Creature - Bear (Mythic)
Trample, hexproof U: Target creature gets -1/-0 until end of turn. RG: Sursei fights target creature. Sursei presents all that is Temur: Savagery, pride and survival at all costs.
8/4
The Beast of Ulvenwald5BG
Legendary Creature - Boar Horror (M)
Trample
Whenever a creature card is put into a graveyard from anywhere, put a +1/+1 counter on The Beast of Ulvenwald. Delirium--Whenever The Beast of Ulvenwald attacks, if there are four or more card types among cards in your graveyard, defending player sacrifices a creature.
5/5
doomfish
Flatline vs. theazurespirit
theazurespirit vs. TriceDefied
TriceDefied vs. netn10
bravelion83
theazurespirit vs. TriceDefied
TriceDefied vs. netn10
netn10 vs. glurman
Moss_Elemental
netn10 vs. glurman
glurman vs. Flatline
Flatline vs. theazurespirit
As you can see, I changed the versus round a bit, as I found it too awkward to do it the usual way with 5 players.
Each judge still has to judge 4 players this way and each player still gets judged by at least two judges.
The score for each versus will be summed up from the two judges and the winner of that versus will be decided from that. If you manage to win so much as one versus you advance.
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
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.
Gorthur, Ferocity of the Wood4GG
Legendary Creature - Bear (M)
Whenever a creature enters the battlefield under an opponent's control, it fights Gorthur, Ferocity of the Wood. "We sentence you to exile in Gorthur's Wood."
- Grimanco Tribunal death sentence
6/4
Design (1.5/3) Appeal - Timmy likes this, he would just like a little more toughness to survive the fights, especially as the fight is mandatory and you can't choose to not put Gorthur in a fight that you already know will kill it. I can't see anything for Johnny to do here. Spike likes the "automatic removal" aspect, but he too would want some way for this to be sure to survive fights, especially at six mana and mythic. (3/3) Elegance - No problems here.
Development (1.5/3) Viability - No problems with the color pie, but I'll be honest I can't really see this as a mythic. With the risk of this not surviving the fight and the fight being mandatory, I would have certainly put this at regular rare. In my opinion, this lacks both the splashiness and the power to feel mythic. (2/3) Balance - Very strong in limited, also because the opponent will have to play a single big creature or two middle ones just to get rid of this if they don't have a removal spell. This may see some Standard play, but I can't see this in bigger formats. In casual this may generate some unfun gameplay if it forces you not to play any creatures to avoid them dying.
Creativity (1/3) Uniqueness - Being a legendary Bear is unique but all the rest is hardly original. (2.5/3) Flavor - Name and flavor text are both fine and make sense with each other and with the mechanics, but they both feel a bit generic. You can substitute Gorthur's name with a different one and it will work anyway.
Polish (3/3) Quality - All good here. (2/2) Main Challenge - Good. (2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Sursei, Savagery Unbound3UGR
Legendary Creature - Bear (Mythic)
Trample, hexproof U: Target creature gets -1/-0 until end of turn. RG: Sursei fights target creature. Sursei presents all that is Temur: Savagery, pride and survival at all costs.
8/4
Design (2/3) Appeal - Timmy likes this quite a lot, the only thing he'd ask you is to give this a little more toughness to help it survive the fights it'll get into. Not a lot for Johnny to do here. Spike likes the overall efficiency of the card and the pseudo-removal abilities. (3/3) Elegance - I see no big problems here.
Development (3/3) Viability - Everything is in color. The strong interaction between the two activated abilities can justify this being mythic. (2.5/3) Balance - Limited bomb. In my opinion, this could also see Standard play, or at least be a card that has potential even if it doesn't become a ubiquitous powerhouse. It somehow reminds me of Savage Knuckleblade in this regard. The only potentially unfun thing may be a repeated activation of the activated abilities depowering or killing all the creatures you play.
Creativity (1.5/3) Uniqueness - Being the first legendary Bear (and maybe the one Surrak punched) makes this feel kind of unique, but the abilities aren't original at all. (2/3) Flavor - The name is good. The flavor text is fine, even if it feels a bit generic to me. If this is the bear Surrak punched, I'd like to know, and the flavor text would have been the perfect place to let me know that.
Polish (2/3) Quality - The order of mana symbols in Temur cards is , so it would have been wrong anyway. No need to capitalize the word "savagery" in the flavor text (half a point deducted). (2/2) Main Challenge - Good. (2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
The Beast of Ulvenwald5BG
Legendary Creature - Boar Horror (M)
Trample
Whenever a creature card is put into a graveyard from anywhere, put a +1/+1 counter on The Beast of Ulvenwald. Delirium--Whenever The Beast of Ulvenwald attacks, if there are four or more card types among cards in your graveyard, defending player sacrifices a creature.
5/5
Design (2.5/3) Appeal - Timmy likes this: a big enough creature with relevant abilities. Johnny can exploit the first triggered ability in good ways, and also has the challenge of reaching delirium (which isn't easy at all). Spike likes the effects, especially the delirium ability, but will never be fully excited by a card that costs seven mana. (2.5/3) Elegance - Wordy, but still very clear.
Development (3/3) Viability - There are both black and green elements in this card, so it makes sense as a Golgari-colored gold card. The potential of huge growth makes this fine at mythic. (2.5/3) Balance - The abilities are strong, but I definitely think that the mana cost is high enough. Limited bomb. Not sure about this in constructed, it might make a splash in Standard, but that's not a given. You also have to keep in mind that delirium looks relatively easy to achieve, but it's actually quite difficult. I've played my share of SOI by now and I only saw delirium active a couple times, also while playing decks specifically built to exploit it. I don't see any problems with this in casual or multiplayer.
Creativity (1/3) Uniqueness - Even though the mechanics are different, the concept of this card (despite how much I like it) feels really similar to The Gitrog Monster, even the colors are the same. Maybe having different colors would have helped this card feel more like it has its own separate identity. Also, while delirium still feels new enough, the rest of the abilities aren't that original. (1/3) Flavor - The name is fine. If there is a monster in Gitrog, there can certainly be a Beast in Ulvenwald. But then, why doesn't this have the Beast creature type? I think this should either have been a Boar Beast, not a Boar Horror (Boar Beast Horror doesn't fit on the type line), or have its name changed somehow. No room for flavor text.
Polish (2.5/3) Quality - There should be a long dash after ability words. You used two minus signs, probably because you have the "non-Latin characters" restriction, so I won't complain about that. But I will about the fact that there should be spaces before and after it, that here are missing (half a point deducted). (2/2) Main Challenge - Good. (2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Elorin, Elusive Widow2GG
Legendary Creature - Spider Assassin (MR)
Hexproof, reach 1B: Destroy target creature that was dealt damage this turn. 1U: Target tapped creature doesn't untap during its controller's next untap step. She spins two webs: one of spidersilk and one of intrigue. Both span the entirety of Fiora.
3/5
Design (2/3) Appeal - Timmy likes this: a big enough creature with relevant abilities. I don't see much to do for Johnny here. Spike likes the pushed mana cost and both abilities being removal. (3/3) Elegance - The text couldn't have been shorter or clearer. The card makes sense as a whole.
Development (3/3) Viability - Hexproof and reach are green and both activated abilities are in color with their costs. This being quite pushed makes mythic rarity feel appropriate. (2.5/3) Balance - This is pushed in terms of mana cost, but after all that's true for most real mythics too. Limited bomb. I wouldn't be surprised to see this in Standard too. The blue ability doesn't look that fun from the other side of the table, as seeing your best creature being freezed repeatedly turn after turn so that it never untaps again doesn't look the best of fun. But there also a positive thing to notice here about casual formats: the Commander crowd will thank you for giving this card a Sultai color identity even though it's technically monogreen.
Creativity (1.5/3) Uniqueness - The idea of a legendary Spider is unique, the abilities not as much. (3/3) Flavor - The name is fine. I love the flavor text here: very well written and it tells a whole story all by itself. It may also be linked to the mechanics: the spidersilk web being the one that kills creature, and the intrigue one reflecting the "doesn't untap" ability. It's not the strongest or clearest link, but it's there.
Polish (3/3) Quality - All good here. (2/2) Main Challenge - Good. (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.)
(2/3) Appeal: Timmy likes it, as does Johnny.
(3/3) Elegance: No problems here.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: No problems here.
(2/3) Balance: It's a bomb in limited, that's for sure. I think both activated abilities should cost higher, since for three mana, it can kill almost any creature, making this unfun.
Creativity -
(1/3) Uniqueness: Nothing here that hasn't been done before.
(3/3) Flavor: No problems here.
Polish -
(1/3) Quality: Order of mana cost shoule be GUR. The last ability should have the card's full name.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met.
Total: 19/25
Design -
(2/3) Appeal: Timmy likes it, and so does Johnny.
(3/3) Elegance: No problems here.
Development -
(1/3) Viability: First of all, I feel this is too plain to be a mythic rare. Second, while I'm sure the wording is okay, but I'm certain they'd word it the following way: “Whenever a creature enters the battlefield under an opponent's control, CARDNAME fights that creature.” It makes more sense both from a mechanical and flavour standpoint.
(1/3) Balance: Since fighting is mandatory, I feel the ability is more of a drawback than an advantage. I think the fighting should be optional, especially if your opponent puts a larger creature into play or a creature with deathtouch. Either the fighting ability should be optional or maybe this creature should have indestructible or regenerate. These changes would also justify the mythic rarity.
Creativity -
(1/3) Uniqueness: Being a legendary Bear is the only thing that's unique about this.
(3/3) Flavor: No problems here.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Wording is okay.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met.
Total: 18/25
Design -
(1/3) Appeal: It's a Johnny card, pure and simple.
(3/3) Elegance: No problems here.
Development -
(2/3) Viability: My main gripe is that it's just green. Yes, I know about Assault Formation, but I think it should be also white, since white has more creatures with defender. It would make for a better commander, I think.
(2/3) Balance: The hexproof will be irritating, but other than that, I have no complaints. It makes other creatures with defender more useful, but, by itself, it's an effective blocker.
Polish -
(2/3) Quality: “Other creatures you control with defender can attack...”
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met.
Total: 19/25
Design -
(2/3) Appeal: It's big enough for Timmy. Johnny will find ways to make it bigger via its triggered ability.
(3/3) Elegance: No problems here.
Development -
(2/3) Viability: I could see this as just black.
(2/3) Balance: It's a bomb in limited. This would likely be seen in a BGU deck with perhaps The Mimeoplasm as the commander. And in that case, reaching delirium would be easy.
Creativity -
(2/3) Uniqueness: This reminds me of Thraximundar. While there are differences, the concept behind it is pretty much the same.
(2/3) Flavor: If it's going to be called “The Beast of Ulvenwald.” it's has to have the creature type Beast.
Polish -
(2/3) Quality: It should be “Delirium – Whenever...“
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met.
Design - (1.5/3) Appeal: I'm sure the overall stats and deckbuilding implications might appeal to the demographics, but my biggest problem with your card is that finally Magic gets a legendary wall and then it's all about attacking? That's just so far off. It's not about providing a sort-of commander for walls. It's about making the biggest baddest wall there's ever been, blocking anything that comes its way and I feel like your card would disappoint many wall fans. (2/3) Elegance: There's a lot going on. I dislike how the first ability affects all defenders and the second one only all others. That's prone to get misplayed. Other than that it's rather simple.
Development - (3/3) Viability: Those are all abilities well within green and some of the best walls are green, so the color is a good pick. The effect is big and partially hard to keep track of, so Mythic is justified. (2.5/3) Balance: A 5/5 blocker for 4 is hard to deal with, but not inherently problematic, as it's not oppressive. Hexproof is quite the concern and makes this hard to play against. There's no way to play around the card other than not attacking.
But anything bigger than 5/5 can still swing, so since it's not putting any pressure on the opponent they might just have enough time to find an attacker big enough.
Creativity - (0.5/3) Uniqueness: It's just Assault Formation on a creature and limiting itself to defenders. I really don't see much new in here. (1.5/3) Flavor: I like the idea of a lord constructing a wall. Could have been a king for more prestige. The flavortext misses the person it's quoting and overall there's no indication why defenders can attack now.
Polish - (3/3) Quality: Looks good. (2/2) Main Challenge: Legendary wall. (2/2) Subchallenges: Mythic and technicially no tribal.
Total: 18/25
Design - (2.5/3) Appeal: At 7 mana it might still tickle Spikes fancy, letting other players sacrifice creatures is a plus. Timmy loves this, eventually it'll be so freaking big and only getting bigger.
I guess there's some deckbuilding implications for Johnny here. (3/3) Elegance: Very straightforward. I'm sure players could recite the card from memory after reading it just once. All elements play into eachother really well.
Development - (2/3) Viability: Black and green are both required and a good fit. Mythic rare isn't as obvious. It's splashy, but not that splashy. Just compare it to the Gitrog Monster. That's drawing cards from lands!
Your's is more an accumulation of effects found on umcommons and low-profile rares. I guess getting the counters from anywhere is a bit higher-profile, but the card itself isn't helping with that. (3/3) Balance: At 7 mana I don't see this making trouble. It's not too weak either, it'll find it's place. You have to jump through quite some hoops to get the sacrifice ability, but until then it's a growing threat, which can do just fine on its own.
Creativity - (2.5/3) Uniqueness: Attack-based sacrifices have been done quite a lot, Thraximundar and Nefarox to name the most prominent examples. Getting the counters from creatures entering the graveyard from anywhere is something new for sure.
It's entering an interesting space between selfmilling and sacrifice-themed decks. (1/3) Flavor: I like the name, but it's a rather poor choice for something that's not a beast by creature type. Some flavortext would have been nice.
Polish - (3/3) Quality: All good. (2/2) Main Challenge: Legendary boar alright! (2/2) Subchallenges: Mythic and no tribal.
Total: 21/25
Design - (2.5/3) Appeal: Spike sees the value. Johnny possible exploits. Not sure Timmy would care all too much about this. With hexproof it makes for a nice commander. (2.5/3) Elegance: No obvious connections, yet quite simple effects to make up for it.
Development - (3/3) Viability: The effects are well in their color, sitting on a very green creature. Mythic rare is probably correct for a card this oppressive. (2/3) Balance: Now, 4 mana 3/5 is a fair deal. The effects are appropriately costed. In combination with hexproof the whole thing becomes very hard to play against. Blocking always results in a trade. Attacking is a race you won't win. Removing the spider is close to impossible.
Swarming is still a viable strategy at the cost of the abilities. So the card is strong, often very hard to win against, but not the end to all Magic.
Creativity - (2.5/3) Uniqueness: The effects are well established. Amplifying damage to lethal isn't done often these days, mostly because of deathtouch probably. Combining them to form a machine like this makes for a fresh card. (2/3) Flavor: Fiora seems like a nice home for your nasty spider. She seems to be sentient and assassination is most often carried out against some sort of payment. I'm not sure about a spider with these kinds of traits and ambitions.
So far spiders are mostly animals in Magic, not that it couldn't be done differently, but making an iconic spider might have been best approached by making the most spidery and animalic of all spiders.
The flavortext reads great.
Polish - (3/3) Quality: Looks clean. (2/2) Main Challenge: Legendary spider. (2/2) Subchallenges: Mythic and no tribal.
Total: 21.5/25
Design - (3/3) Appeal: 8 power bears! Timmy is jumping in circles. Spike will see the value in a hexproofed creature removal. I heard hexproof commanders are all the rage, at 3 colors this would be a prime candidate. (3/3) Elegance: Pretty simple. There's some obvious connections here.
Development - (2.5/3) Viability: Mythic seems like a good pick for something that makes the board situation this complex. Green and Red is appropriate for that level of fighting and blue of course for -1/-0.
Having to repeatedly activate the second ability when you want to give -X/-0 is problematic for Magic Online. Most likely XU: would have been a better choice, although it'd change the powerlevel considerably. (3/3) Balance: 4 toughness isn't much, but when paired with hexproof anything higher than that quickly becomes unfair. It makes for some interesting balance with the fighting and the power reduction.
Attacking with this has some interesting interactions, as you can fight any blocker for extra trample damage. The color requirements are tough for this one though, so I don't think it's problematic.
Creativity - (2.5/3) Uniqueness:Sword Dancer comes close, but I think there hasn't been much repeated attack reduction like that. Fighting on demand hasn't been done much either. They're established abilities, but haven't been brought to this level and combination yet. (2/3) Flavor: A great call to make a Temur bear. The name is nice, the flavortext is also good. I would just have wanted an explanation for what's going on with the attack reduction, as that's typicially illusion/trickery/mind-magic that I don't see a bear using.
Polish - (2.5/3) Quality: Names of legendary creatures are only shortened when they appear more than once. (2/2) Main Challenge: Legenbeary! (2/2) Subchallenges: Mythic and no bear tribal.
So, these would be the summed up results:
Flatline (37) vs. theazurespirit (40) : theazurespirit wins!
theazurespirit (40) vs. TriceDefied (43.5) : TriceDefied wins!
TriceDefied (43.5) vs. netn10 (41.5) : TriceDefied wins!
netn10 (41.5) vs. glurman (36.5) : netn10 wins!
glurman (36.5) vs. Flatline (37): Flatline wins!
Bear in mind that things are not final until the deadline, so changes may still happen.
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
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Dreams Come True - With eldritch horrors comes madness. With madness.. vivid hallucinations. Dreams if you so will. Dreams roaming freely.
Legendary dreams. As old as the desires in each and every Magic player. Desire for certain creature types to get their own legendary sometime.
Flawless transition, this months theme is saved.
Main Challenge: Design a legendary Bear, Spider, Wall, Boar, Homunculus or Squirrel.
Subchallenge 1: It's a mythic rare.
Subchallenge 2: Does not mention its own creature type in the card text.
Sub1: The orange symbol. You know, the one that gives you a free ticket on powerlevel?
Sub2: Yes, bear can care about spider, but not about other bear. No tribal. If it's part of a name it's fine, just not as a functional creature type reference.
MCC Rules
(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? An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
(X/2) Subchallenges: One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Total: X/25
DEADLINES
Player deadline: Sunday, May 22th 2016
Judge deadline: Wednesday, May 25th 2016
Judges:
doomfish
bravelion83
Moss_Elemental
Players:
TriceDefied
RaikouRider
netn10
theazurespirit
Flatline
glurman
(This will be the versus round.)
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
Legendary Creature — Wall (M)
Defender, hexproof, reach
Each creature you control with defender assigns combat damage equal to its toughness rather than its power.
Other creatures you control with defender may attack as though they didn't have defender.
"Send them all. Defense of the kingdom is no longer a concern."
0/5
Legendary Creature - Bear (M)
Whenever a creature enters the battlefield under an opponent's control, it fights Gorthur, Ferocity of the Wood.
"We sentence you to exile in Gorthur's Wood."
- Grimanco Tribunal death sentence
6/4
Edit: Name fiddlings
Legendary Creature - Homunculus
Sursei, Savagery Unbound 3UGR
Legendary Creature - Bear (Mythic)
Trample, hexproof
U: Target creature gets -1/-0 until end of turn.
RG: Sursei fights target creature.
Sursei presents all that is Temur: Savagery, pride and survival at all costs.
8/4
Legendary Creature - Boar Horror (M)
Trample
Whenever a creature card is put into a graveyard from anywhere, put a +1/+1 counter on The Beast of Ulvenwald.
Delirium--Whenever The Beast of Ulvenwald attacks, if there are four or more card types among cards in your graveyard, defending player sacrifices a creature.
5/5
doomfish
Flatline vs. theazurespirit
theazurespirit vs. TriceDefied
TriceDefied vs. netn10
bravelion83
theazurespirit vs. TriceDefied
TriceDefied vs. netn10
netn10 vs. glurman
Moss_Elemental
netn10 vs. glurman
glurman vs. Flatline
Flatline vs. theazurespirit
As you can see, I changed the versus round a bit, as I found it too awkward to do it the usual way with 5 players.
Each judge still has to judge 4 players this way and each player still gets judged by at least two judges.
The score for each versus will be summed up from the two judges and the winner of that versus will be decided from that.
If you manage to win so much as one versus you advance.
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
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 - Timmy likes this, he would just like a little more toughness to survive the fights, especially as the fight is mandatory and you can't choose to not put Gorthur in a fight that you already know will kill it. I can't see anything for Johnny to do here. Spike likes the "automatic removal" aspect, but he too would want some way for this to be sure to survive fights, especially at six mana and mythic.
(3/3) Elegance - No problems here.
Development
(1.5/3) Viability - No problems with the color pie, but I'll be honest I can't really see this as a mythic. With the risk of this not surviving the fight and the fight being mandatory, I would have certainly put this at regular rare. In my opinion, this lacks both the splashiness and the power to feel mythic.
(2/3) Balance - Very strong in limited, also because the opponent will have to play a single big creature or two middle ones just to get rid of this if they don't have a removal spell. This may see some Standard play, but I can't see this in bigger formats. In casual this may generate some unfun gameplay if it forces you not to play any creatures to avoid them dying.
Creativity
(1/3) Uniqueness - Being a legendary Bear is unique but all the rest is hardly original.
(2.5/3) Flavor - Name and flavor text are both fine and make sense with each other and with the mechanics, but they both feel a bit generic. You can substitute Gorthur's name with a different one and it will work anyway.
Polish
(3/3) Quality - All good here.
(2/2) Main Challenge - Good.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 19/25
Design
(2/3) Appeal - Timmy likes this quite a lot, the only thing he'd ask you is to give this a little more toughness to help it survive the fights it'll get into. Not a lot for Johnny to do here. Spike likes the overall efficiency of the card and the pseudo-removal abilities.
(3/3) Elegance - I see no big problems here.
Development
(3/3) Viability - Everything is in color. The strong interaction between the two activated abilities can justify this being mythic.
(2.5/3) Balance - Limited bomb. In my opinion, this could also see Standard play, or at least be a card that has potential even if it doesn't become a ubiquitous powerhouse. It somehow reminds me of Savage Knuckleblade in this regard. The only potentially unfun thing may be a repeated activation of the activated abilities depowering or killing all the creatures you play.
Creativity
(1.5/3) Uniqueness - Being the first legendary Bear (and maybe the one Surrak punched) makes this feel kind of unique, but the abilities aren't original at all.
(2/3) Flavor - The name is good. The flavor text is fine, even if it feels a bit generic to me. If this is the bear Surrak punched, I'd like to know, and the flavor text would have been the perfect place to let me know that.
Polish
(2/3) Quality - The order of mana symbols in Temur cards is , so it would have been wrong anyway. No need to capitalize the word "savagery" in the flavor text (half a point deducted).
(2/2) Main Challenge - Good.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 20/25
Design
(2.5/3) Appeal - Timmy likes this: a big enough creature with relevant abilities. Johnny can exploit the first triggered ability in good ways, and also has the challenge of reaching delirium (which isn't easy at all). Spike likes the effects, especially the delirium ability, but will never be fully excited by a card that costs seven mana.
(2.5/3) Elegance - Wordy, but still very clear.
Development
(3/3) Viability - There are both black and green elements in this card, so it makes sense as a Golgari-colored gold card. The potential of huge growth makes this fine at mythic.
(2.5/3) Balance - The abilities are strong, but I definitely think that the mana cost is high enough. Limited bomb. Not sure about this in constructed, it might make a splash in Standard, but that's not a given. You also have to keep in mind that delirium looks relatively easy to achieve, but it's actually quite difficult. I've played my share of SOI by now and I only saw delirium active a couple times, also while playing decks specifically built to exploit it. I don't see any problems with this in casual or multiplayer.
Creativity
(1/3) Uniqueness - Even though the mechanics are different, the concept of this card (despite how much I like it) feels really similar to The Gitrog Monster, even the colors are the same. Maybe having different colors would have helped this card feel more like it has its own separate identity. Also, while delirium still feels new enough, the rest of the abilities aren't that original.
(1/3) Flavor - The name is fine. If there is a monster in Gitrog, there can certainly be a Beast in Ulvenwald. But then, why doesn't this have the Beast creature type? I think this should either have been a Boar Beast, not a Boar Horror (Boar Beast Horror doesn't fit on the type line), or have its name changed somehow. No room for flavor text.
Polish
(2.5/3) Quality - There should be a long dash after ability words. You used two minus signs, probably because you have the "non-Latin characters" restriction, so I won't complain about that. But I will about the fact that there should be spaces before and after it, that here are missing (half a point deducted).
(2/2) Main Challenge - Good.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 19/25
Design
(2/3) Appeal - Timmy likes this: a big enough creature with relevant abilities. I don't see much to do for Johnny here. Spike likes the pushed mana cost and both abilities being removal.
(3/3) Elegance - The text couldn't have been shorter or clearer. The card makes sense as a whole.
Development
(3/3) Viability - Hexproof and reach are green and both activated abilities are in color with their costs. This being quite pushed makes mythic rarity feel appropriate.
(2.5/3) Balance - This is pushed in terms of mana cost, but after all that's true for most real mythics too. Limited bomb. I wouldn't be surprised to see this in Standard too. The blue ability doesn't look that fun from the other side of the table, as seeing your best creature being freezed repeatedly turn after turn so that it never untaps again doesn't look the best of fun. But there also a positive thing to notice here about casual formats: the Commander crowd will thank you for giving this card a Sultai color identity even though it's technically monogreen.
Creativity
(1.5/3) Uniqueness - The idea of a legendary Spider is unique, the abilities not as much.
(3/3) Flavor - The name is fine. I love the flavor text here: very well written and it tells a whole story all by itself. It may also be linked to the mechanics: the spidersilk web being the one that kills creature, and the intrigue one reflecting the "doesn't untap" ability. It's not the strongest or clearest link, but it's there.
Polish
(3/3) Quality - All good here.
(2/2) Main Challenge - Good.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 22/25
glurman: 18.5
netn10: 20
theazurespirit: 19
TriceDefied: 22
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.)
(2/3) Appeal: Timmy likes it, as does Johnny.
(3/3) Elegance: No problems here.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: No problems here.
(2/3) Balance: It's a bomb in limited, that's for sure. I think both activated abilities should cost higher, since for three mana, it can kill almost any creature, making this unfun.
Creativity -
(1/3) Uniqueness: Nothing here that hasn't been done before.
(3/3) Flavor: No problems here.
Polish -
(1/3) Quality: Order of mana cost shoule be GUR. The last ability should have the card's full name.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met.
Total: 19/25
(2/3) Appeal: Timmy likes it, and so does Johnny.
(3/3) Elegance: No problems here.
Development -
(1/3) Viability: First of all, I feel this is too plain to be a mythic rare. Second, while I'm sure the wording is okay, but I'm certain they'd word it the following way: “Whenever a creature enters the battlefield under an opponent's control, CARDNAME fights that creature.” It makes more sense both from a mechanical and flavour standpoint.
(1/3) Balance: Since fighting is mandatory, I feel the ability is more of a drawback than an advantage. I think the fighting should be optional, especially if your opponent puts a larger creature into play or a creature with deathtouch. Either the fighting ability should be optional or maybe this creature should have indestructible or regenerate. These changes would also justify the mythic rarity.
Creativity -
(1/3) Uniqueness: Being a legendary Bear is the only thing that's unique about this.
(3/3) Flavor: No problems here.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Wording is okay.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met.
Total: 18/25
(1/3) Appeal: It's a Johnny card, pure and simple.
(3/3) Elegance: No problems here.
Development -
(2/3) Viability: My main gripe is that it's just green. Yes, I know about Assault Formation, but I think it should be also white, since white has more creatures with defender. It would make for a better commander, I think.
(2/3) Balance: The hexproof will be irritating, but other than that, I have no complaints. It makes other creatures with defender more useful, but, by itself, it's an effective blocker.
Creativity -
(2/3) Uniqueness: A bit of Assault Formation and Rolling Stones and some legs.
(3/3) Flavor: No problems here.
Polish -
(2/3) Quality: “Other creatures you control with defender can attack...”
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met.
Total: 19/25
(2/3) Appeal: It's big enough for Timmy. Johnny will find ways to make it bigger via its triggered ability.
(3/3) Elegance: No problems here.
Development -
(2/3) Viability: I could see this as just black.
(2/3) Balance: It's a bomb in limited. This would likely be seen in a BGU deck with perhaps The Mimeoplasm as the commander. And in that case, reaching delirium would be easy.
Creativity -
(2/3) Uniqueness: This reminds me of Thraximundar. While there are differences, the concept behind it is pretty much the same.
(2/3) Flavor: If it's going to be called “The Beast of Ulvenwald.” it's has to have the creature type Beast.
Polish -
(2/3) Quality: It should be “Delirium – Whenever...“
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met.
Total: 19/25
glurman: 18
Flatline: 19
theazurespirit: 19
As always, no complaints.
(1.5/3) Appeal: I'm sure the overall stats and deckbuilding implications might appeal to the demographics, but my biggest problem with your card is that finally Magic gets a legendary wall and then it's all about attacking? That's just so far off. It's not about providing a sort-of commander for walls. It's about making the biggest baddest wall there's ever been, blocking anything that comes its way and I feel like your card would disappoint many wall fans.
(2/3) Elegance: There's a lot going on. I dislike how the first ability affects all defenders and the second one only all others. That's prone to get misplayed. Other than that it's rather simple.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: Those are all abilities well within green and some of the best walls are green, so the color is a good pick. The effect is big and partially hard to keep track of, so Mythic is justified.
(2.5/3) Balance: A 5/5 blocker for 4 is hard to deal with, but not inherently problematic, as it's not oppressive. Hexproof is quite the concern and makes this hard to play against. There's no way to play around the card other than not attacking.
But anything bigger than 5/5 can still swing, so since it's not putting any pressure on the opponent they might just have enough time to find an attacker big enough.
Creativity -
(0.5/3) Uniqueness: It's just Assault Formation on a creature and limiting itself to defenders. I really don't see much new in here.
(1.5/3) Flavor: I like the idea of a lord constructing a wall. Could have been a king for more prestige. The flavortext misses the person it's quoting and overall there's no indication why defenders can attack now.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Looks good.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Legendary wall.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Mythic and technicially no tribal.
Total: 18/25
(2.5/3) Appeal: At 7 mana it might still tickle Spikes fancy, letting other players sacrifice creatures is a plus. Timmy loves this, eventually it'll be so freaking big and only getting bigger.
I guess there's some deckbuilding implications for Johnny here.
(3/3) Elegance: Very straightforward. I'm sure players could recite the card from memory after reading it just once. All elements play into eachother really well.
Development -
(2/3) Viability: Black and green are both required and a good fit. Mythic rare isn't as obvious. It's splashy, but not that splashy. Just compare it to the Gitrog Monster. That's drawing cards from lands!
Your's is more an accumulation of effects found on umcommons and low-profile rares. I guess getting the counters from anywhere is a bit higher-profile, but the card itself isn't helping with that.
(3/3) Balance: At 7 mana I don't see this making trouble. It's not too weak either, it'll find it's place. You have to jump through quite some hoops to get the sacrifice ability, but until then it's a growing threat, which can do just fine on its own.
Creativity -
(2.5/3) Uniqueness: Attack-based sacrifices have been done quite a lot, Thraximundar and Nefarox to name the most prominent examples. Getting the counters from creatures entering the graveyard from anywhere is something new for sure.
It's entering an interesting space between selfmilling and sacrifice-themed decks.
(1/3) Flavor: I like the name, but it's a rather poor choice for something that's not a beast by creature type. Some flavortext would have been nice.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: All good.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Legendary boar alright!
(2/2) Subchallenges: Mythic and no tribal.
Total: 21/25
(2.5/3) Appeal: Spike sees the value. Johnny possible exploits. Not sure Timmy would care all too much about this. With hexproof it makes for a nice commander.
(2.5/3) Elegance: No obvious connections, yet quite simple effects to make up for it.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: The effects are well in their color, sitting on a very green creature. Mythic rare is probably correct for a card this oppressive.
(2/3) Balance: Now, 4 mana 3/5 is a fair deal. The effects are appropriately costed. In combination with hexproof the whole thing becomes very hard to play against. Blocking always results in a trade. Attacking is a race you won't win. Removing the spider is close to impossible.
Swarming is still a viable strategy at the cost of the abilities. So the card is strong, often very hard to win against, but not the end to all Magic.
Creativity -
(2.5/3) Uniqueness: The effects are well established. Amplifying damage to lethal isn't done often these days, mostly because of deathtouch probably. Combining them to form a machine like this makes for a fresh card.
(2/3) Flavor: Fiora seems like a nice home for your nasty spider. She seems to be sentient and assassination is most often carried out against some sort of payment. I'm not sure about a spider with these kinds of traits and ambitions.
So far spiders are mostly animals in Magic, not that it couldn't be done differently, but making an iconic spider might have been best approached by making the most spidery and animalic of all spiders.
The flavortext reads great.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Looks clean.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Legendary spider.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Mythic and no tribal.
Total: 21.5/25
(3/3) Appeal: 8 power bears! Timmy is jumping in circles. Spike will see the value in a hexproofed creature removal. I heard hexproof commanders are all the rage, at 3 colors this would be a prime candidate.
(3/3) Elegance: Pretty simple. There's some obvious connections here.
Development -
(2.5/3) Viability: Mythic seems like a good pick for something that makes the board situation this complex. Green and Red is appropriate for that level of fighting and blue of course for -1/-0.
Having to repeatedly activate the second ability when you want to give -X/-0 is problematic for Magic Online. Most likely XU: would have been a better choice, although it'd change the powerlevel considerably.
(3/3) Balance: 4 toughness isn't much, but when paired with hexproof anything higher than that quickly becomes unfair. It makes for some interesting balance with the fighting and the power reduction.
Attacking with this has some interesting interactions, as you can fight any blocker for extra trample damage. The color requirements are tough for this one though, so I don't think it's problematic.
Creativity -
(2.5/3) Uniqueness: Sword Dancer comes close, but I think there hasn't been much repeated attack reduction like that. Fighting on demand hasn't been done much either. They're established abilities, but haven't been brought to this level and combination yet.
(2/3) Flavor: A great call to make a Temur bear. The name is nice, the flavortext is also good. I would just have wanted an explanation for what's going on with the attack reduction, as that's typicially illusion/trickery/mind-magic that I don't see a bear using.
Polish -
(2.5/3) Quality: Names of legendary creatures are only shortened when they appear more than once.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Legenbeary!
(2/2) Subchallenges: Mythic and no bear tribal.
Total: 22.5/25
theazurespirit 21
TriceDefied 21.5
netn10 22.5
So, these would be the summed up results:
Flatline (37) vs. theazurespirit (40) : theazurespirit wins!
theazurespirit (40) vs. TriceDefied (43.5) : TriceDefied wins!
TriceDefied (43.5) vs. netn10 (41.5) : TriceDefied wins!
netn10 (41.5) vs. glurman (36.5) : netn10 wins!
glurman (36.5) vs. Flatline (37): Flatline wins!
Bear in mind that things are not final until the deadline, so changes may still happen.
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