(This month's banner is my own elaboration on the art of the card Paliano, The High City, by Adam Paquette)
August MCC Round 2
"Masters of artifice"
In the story "Like Cogwork", we get to know Muzzio and his apprentice Irie, and we get to see how Muzzio becomes Vice Chancellor at the Academy of Paliano. As always on Fiora, the means are questionable to say the least... Anyway, Muzzio learned from Daretti the ways of artifice and now his constructs perform all kinds of services for the people of Paliano, while secretly recording potentially useful information for their master of course...
Main challenge: Design a colored artifact. It may be an artifact creature but also a noncreature artifact.
This is meant to represent one of Muzzio's or Daretti's designs.
Subchallenges:
1- The card has an activated ability with T in its activation cost.
2- The card has a converted mana cost of 3 or less.
The card has to have colored mana in its mana cost. Having only generic mana in the mana cost but colored mana in the rules text does NOT count. Hybrid mana and Phyrexian mana are ok, provided they have at least one colored part.
For subchallenge 1, the activated ability can have any other additional costs in addition to the tap symbol. Those additional costs can be both mana costs and/or all kinds of non-mana costs.
If you have any more doubts, just ask, preferably in the discussion thread.
A reminder to everyone:
• In the MCC, putting rarity on cards is mandatory! If you don't put a rarity on your card, expect huge deductions in both Viability AND Quality.
• Also, you should format your text cards accordingly to the forum rules (see the "this formatting looks best" spoiler in the linked OP). Again, expect deductions in Quality otherwise.
With the announcement of the new templating of creating tokens (creature and non-creature) with the Rise from the Tides promo, should we begin using that language on the next round, if we so choose to create a card that generates tokens? I hold the MCC in high regard and that the contest has high standards for card creation, so it makes sense to me that our designs continue to develop appropriate design language.
Please let me know, Bravelion or a congregation of judges as to what you would like to do.
Thanks,
Folza
Thanks for posting this Folza. I wasn't aware of this change until just now. If people are going to be held to the new template in the next round (which is probably the correct way to go), I highly recommend that the new template is mentioned and highlighted in the OP. That will help to get the word out there and avoid any feel bad moments. Another option would be to adopt a short grace period in which either template would be acceptable. Either way, posts like Folza's are very helpful to those that aren't able to follow MTG as closely as others. Thanks again Folza!
At the contrary, I was perfectly aware of that promo but just didn't think about the fact that people might want to use that new wording already instead of waiting until Kaladesh comes out, as it will officially debut there. I thought about what to do and I have reached the following personal conclusion. As the official debut of Kaladesh is on September 2nd at PAX West, I personally will keep using the "put onto the battlefield" wording until then and only start using the "create" wording after that date. I don't expect others to follow the same practice, everyone is free to do what they want.
I think the proposal of a short period of time in which both wordings are acceptable in our contests sounds the most reasonable to me. I personally say that period should begin right now and end once Kaladesh is released (the last day of September). It's two months in which we all can become used to the new wording and all other eventual changes Kaladesh might bring (I was reading yesterday a thread in the Rumor Mill where vehicles were mentioned... and there's still Mechanic E unaccounted for by the way...).
So let me state this in an official way. The following will be valid from now on for me personally as a judge, and I'll enforce it as host in the last month of July (and in August too if no one else volunteers and I host again):
• Both "put onto the battlefield" and "create" wordings will be acceptable starting right now and ending with the end of the September MCC. Just make sure your card follows the rules of English grammar, and also notice the different place of the word "tapped" in the two wordings.
• Starting with the October MCC, I will no longer accept the "put onto the battlefield" wording for tokens, and I WILL deduct points for that then.
This is what I am going to do and that's my own personal decision. Other hosts and judges are free to do whatever they want, but I'd like if we all followed a common way. The only thing I would ask for to other hosts and judges is to be as clear as possible about what they want to do about this beforehand. Thanks. Obviously all of this is going to be repeated in the OP of the final round of July and in all future rounds I will judge or host from now until the end of September.
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: Tuesday, August 16th 23:59 EDT
Judge deadline: Friday, August 19th 23:59 EDT
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.)
Golboz, Eye of the Network2U
Legendary Artifact (R)
Whenever an opponent casts a spell, put an observation counter on Golboz, Eye of the Network.
Remove X observation counters from Golboz, T : Gain control of target nonland permanent with a converted mana cost X or less until end of turn. Untap it. The more it sees, the better it understands what to take.
Corrupted PowerstoneR
Artifact [R]
You can't search your library. t: Add R to your mana pool. "The worst thing you can do is have too many ideas at once."
—Daretti, Scrap Savant
Detector Drone
Artifact Creature — Drone (U)
Flying, hexproof
: Until end of turn, creatures with hexproof can be the targets of spells and abilities as though they didn't have hexproof. By the time the search light is on you, it's usually too late.
0/2
(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)
Ocular Observer1UU
Artifact Creature - Homunculus (Rare)
You may draw cards from the bottom of your library instead from the top. t: Scry X, where X's the number of artifacts you control. It has one eye, yet it may see infinate possibilities.
0/1
Blackblade1B
Legendary Artifact - Equipment {M}
Equipped creature gets +X/+X for each soul counter on Blackblade.
Whenever equipped creature deals combat damage, put a soul counter on Blackblade. T, Remove X soul counters from Blackblade: Target creatures gets -X/-X until end of turn.
Equip 2 Dakkon's soul still lies dormant in Blackblade, bound eternally by Geyadrone Dihada.
Cogwork Researcher1UR
Artifact Creature - Construct (R) T, Discard an artifact card: Draw a card.
Sacrifice Cogwork Researcher: Return another target artifact card from your graveyard to your hand. "Some say that Muzzio's vast network of cogwork servants serves simply to run his Academy. Others think he has... loftier goals."
—Sevaril, High City Informant
1/4
Harvest Scythe1GG
Artifact - Equipment (R)
Equipped creature gets +2/+2 and has trample.
Whenever equipped creature deals combat damage to a player, you may untap all lands you control.
Equip GG
Surveillance Collector2U
Artifact Creature — Construct (U)
Flying 3, T: Choose target opponent. Scry X, where X is the number of artifacts that player controls.
When Surveillance Collector dies, draw a card.
1/2
Prized Hatchlings1U
Artifact Creature - Bird Construct (R)
Flying, hexproof
Whenever a nontoken artifact enters the battlefield under your control, create a 0/1 blue Bird Construct artifact creature token with flying and hexproof. 2U, , Sacrifice three artifacts: Search your library for an artifact card with converted mana cost 6 or greater, reveal that card and put it into your hand, then shuffle your library.
0/1
Swiftsilver Pike2W
Artifact - Equipment (U)
Flash
Equipped creature gets +1/+1 and has first strike. T: Attach Swiftsilver Pike to target creature you control.
Equip 1
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
Apologies for the later entry into this round. Airplane and holiday delays don't help with the MCC, haha!
Reconnaissance Thopter1U
Artifact Creature - Thopter (R)
Flying, prowess U, T: Target opponent reveals his or her hand. You may draw a card for each artifact
card revealed this way. "A delightful contraption designed for accuracy, efficiency, and espionage." - Muzzio, Vice Chancellor
2/2
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.)
Is it too late to submit my card? I thought the player deadline was Friday. :/
Justttt in case, although I understand if it is too late:
High Palanio Spyglass3
Artifact (U)
Whenever a creature enters the battlefield under your control, if a land also entered the battlefield under your control this turn, put a +1/+1 counter on that creature. T, Remove a +1/+1 counter from target creature: Draw a card. "If you're not paying, you're the product."
Unfortunately it is too late, as the deadline has passed. Bravelion's word is final that the round is closed and the brackets have already been set up.
Unfortunately it is too late, as the deadline has passed. Bravelion's word is final that the round is closed and the brackets have already been set up.
I thought that would be the case, totally understandable. Good luck to everyone.
Corrupted PowerstoneR
Artifact [R]
You can't search your library. t: Add R to your mana pool. "The worst thing you can do is have too many ideas at once."
—Daretti, Scrap Savant
Design - (2.5/3) Appeal: A power nine reprint? Well, all three player types are immediately excited for the possibility of a possibly rebalanced Mox Ruby.
However, being unable to search your library is primarily a Johnny problem and secondarily a Timmy problem (can't search for lands). Spike thrives under pressure, however. (3/3) Elegance: Well, this is a card that simply does exactly what it says.
Development - (1.5/3) Viability: With hardly a doubt, this card is definitely red, since it is a mana accelerant. It also prohibits library searching, which is something that red does the least of out of all colors already. This card at first looks like a 'build around me' card, yet that is not quite true. It could be put into virtually any red deck and do well, but that is more a balance issue.
The rarity is also techically correct, but I believe this card would have done better conceptually as a mythic rare legendary artifact. Its intended power level is just so high.
Finally, there can be no doubt that this card would warp any limited block in its current state, even at rare. It would also require a specific limited block where the drawback was actually meaningful enough for its color. (0/3) Balance: This card was clearly intended to be balanced on a knife's edge, but unbalanced is the only word that I immediately have for it. One of Magic's more recent directions is towards slower mana acceleration (R.I.P. Llanowar Elves), and this is definitely faster and more difficult to remove than the aforementioned card, color shifted or otherwise. On the first turn that it is played (which can be turn 1), it is a 0 mana artifact that reads 'You can't search your library.' After that, it is Mox Ruby except for the minor downside.
This is not a problem in mono-red unless you have a specific need to play Sarkhan's Triumph (a.k.a. Draconic Tutor), but you would definitely run this card over that one, and even if not, you could theoretically just do your library searching and then play this card afterwards. Simply put, this card's downside does not at all equal 1, which this card otherwise needs plus the drawback, then this would actually result in an interesting counterpart to Fire Diamond (yet maybe still a little too strong). Especially since you could play multiples of this at once without the drawback meaningfully stacking. The drawback provides untapped design space, but I believe that belongs elsewhere and not on a mana accelerant like this. Searching your library in limited is rarer unlike in standard, so this card would bring even more havoc to that format in particular. As for casual, it is typically not fun to get rushed down by an accelerated mono-red deck. This is less of a problem in multiplayer due to politics, where this card 'might' be plausible.
Creativity - (2.5/3) Uniqueness: It feels very weird to give a power nine reprint a near-perfect uniqueness score, but I literally could not think of nor find an official card with the words "You can't search your library". Not a single one. Congratulations. One of the closest cards that our judge panel altogether could find was a card from Future Sight: Aven Mindcensor. (2.5/3) Flavor: I am not really sure as to how this name and that flavor text go together for Vorthos, but they both make sense, and this card definitely feels red.
Polish - (3/3) Quality: Perfect! (2/2) Main Challenge: Main challenge met! (2/2) Subchallenges: Both subchallenges met!
Total: 19/25
Final thought: Ah, development, how it is the downfall of innumerable card designs.
Golboz, Eye of the Network2U
Legendary Artifact (R)
Whenever an opponent casts a spell, put an observation counter on Golboz, Eye of the Network.
Remove X observation counters from Golboz, T : Gain control of target nonland permanent with a converted mana cost X or less until end of turn. Untap it. The more it sees, the better it understands what to take.
Design - (3/3) Appeal: This card is definitely appealing to all three of the player psychographics. It is a big effect for Timmy, a neat card to build with for Johnny, and a useful card to play with for Spike. Bravo! (3/3) Elegance: This card could theoretically give the target haste until end of turn, but I believe that it would indeed require red in its cost to do that, which has been rightly left out when considering the mana cost. As a result, this card definitely does what it does.
Development - (3/3) Viability: In the right sort of artifact-focused block, this sort of legendary artifact could definitely find a place. It is rare, so it will definitely be more of a show-stopper in limited and otherwise less of a headache there. It feels unnecessary to mention that blue is the primary ruler of effects that change control of permanents, but there you are. (3/3) Balance: Okay, so for the same converted mana cost as Act of Treason, you can cast this instead. The upsides to doing so are that you can take control of any (nonland) permanent, not just creatures (enchantments or other artifacts also fall into this category), and it can be done at instant speed if necessary. The downsides include a delayed effect, a lack of haste, and susceptibility to artifact removal. This card is notably cheaper compared to other effects like it at the cost of being repeatable yet temporary. So, this card is adaptable, too!
In addition, this card takes skill to play versus but it is definitely not impossible. All the opponent has to do is stay on curve, and their biggest creature will typically be just out of reach of this card's effect. Thus, quite a bit of fun, similar to trying to prevent werewolves from transforming, is created as a result!
Oh, by the way, this card is clearly just a ridiculous amount of fun in casual and multiplayer. It is amazing what giving a delay to a powerful effect can do for game health and enjoyment!
Notably, this card definitely has the potential to be almost like a limited bomb in any limited format (due to a lack of artifact removal), but rares are allowed to do that as far as I am concerned.
Creativity - (2/3) Uniqueness: Blue gaining control of other permanents is iconic, but artifacts doing the same is actually rather unique. Good job. (3/3) Flavor: The flavor here is spot on. This card just has that wonderful legendary feel without even needing to be a creature.
Polish - (2.5/3) Quality: Just a couple minor qualitative errors here. In the phrase 'with a converted mana cost X or less', the "a" is redundant and should be nixed. Otherwise, the only other error is an unnecessary space between the tap symbol and the colon (yes I noticed that). (2/2) Main Challenge: Main challenge met! (2/2) Subchallenges: Both subchallenges met!
Total: 23.5/25
Final thoughts: This card actually took me on a bit of a wild ride as I was judging it. First, I thought that it could be too strong, then I thought that it could actually be on the weak side...it was actually just right in its execution.
Sungear BirdcageW
Artifact (U) 2, T, Put Sungear Birdcage on the top of your library: Create 1/1 white Bird artifact creature token with flying.
Design - (0.5/3) Appeal: This is a rather small and bland effect, unfortunately. Tammy is bored and so is Spike. Only for Jenny is this card maybe worthwhile, but there is nothing to be ecstatic about. (2.5/3) Elegance: This card could definitely benefit from some flavor text, but it otherwise does exactly what it says that it does. However, it is just a little weird that you need to tap this noncreature artifact and then put it on top of your library.
Development - (2/3) Viability: For such a simple and approachable effect, I see no reason that this card could not be common instead. White's weakness as a color is also card drawing, and exacerbating that weakness while trying to play a card like this feels rather unnecessary. (0/3) Balance: This card feels like a missed opportunity in terms of limited and pauper gameplay. For W, you can play this card or Suntail Hawk. The reason to play this card over its counterpart is for artifact-based effects like Artificer's Epiphany and the like. However, this effect just very overcosted. Either pay 2 along with the tap, and then you have a cheap token engine that may possibly be worth an uncommon slot in a block. Or, nix the mana cost and tapping in order to keep the intriguing part of this simplistic card.
Even better than putting this card on top of your library in that case may be just to sacrifice it. As a result, it could serve as delve and delirium fodder in the graveyard rather than possibly costing a valuable draw during the following turn.
Even in the edge case of using this card to prevent oneself from being milled to death, there are better artifact cards for that very purpose like Epitaph Golem.
I mean, this card is fine, if ignorable, in any format or casual. There are just better cheap artifacts.
Creativity - (1.5/3) Uniqueness: White already likes to make flying tokens, be they spirits or birds or the like. Putting this card on the top of your library is intriguing, but it has been done before. (1.5/3) Flavor: There is no flavor text here despite the card having plenty of room for it. Otherwise, what flavor there is makes reasonable sense.
Polish - (2.5/3) Quality: Admittedly, create is a very new form of wording. I believe that either an 'a' or a 'one' or a similar word is missing between the terms 'Create' and '1/1'. (Here is the link to the 'create' promotional card for reference.) (2/2) Main Challenge: Main challenge met! (2/2) Subchallenges: Both subchallenges met!
Total: 14.5/25
Final thought: I believe that this card nevertheless had quite a bit of flavorful potential with a myriad of possible flavor texts and card arts.
High Palanio Spyglass3
Artifact (U)
Whenever a creature enters the battlefield under your control, if a land also entered the battlefield under your control this turn, put a +1/+1 counter on that creature. T, Remove a +1/+1 counter from target creature: Draw a card. "If you're not paying, you're the product."
Design - (2/3) Appeal: This card is generically useful enough to appeal to everyone without particularly exciting everyone. It makes creatures bigger, draws cards, and may require a bit of skill to play with in some cases. Unfortunately, this card is broadly appealing but not deeply exciting. (2.5/3) Elegance: This card has certain requirements including timely land drops and numerous instances of +1/+1 counter management, but nothing extremely inelegant.
Development - (2/3) Viability: This card pleasantly reminds me of landfall, but it was correct to leave out that ability word on this card. The triggers are similar, but different.
This card is possibly worthy of rare since it can reliably buff up any color of creature, however. This is the sort of artifact that needs a color identity. (2/3) Balance: Continuing from above, the color identity that meshes with this card the best is green. It cares about land drops, buffs creatures, and uses buffs to draw cards. As such, this card mechanically could comfortably cost about 2G. The converted mana cost of about 3 is still correct, however. If this card really needed to remain colorless, 4 might be a better mana cost, or it could require 1 along with the tap in order to draw a card.
As a colorless artifact, there is a degree of concern that this effect could get out of control in certain cases, particularly in cases involving tokens.
Otherwise, this card plays well in all formats and provides another interesting use for +1/+1 counters. Again, though, requiring 1 along with the tap for the card drawing effect may be advisable to stay on the safer side.
Creativity - (2/3) Uniqueness: These sort of effects have been done before, but this combination is an interesting way to do it all at once. (1.5/3) Flavor: This card feels a little all over the place in terms of flavor. So, it is a spyglass that spies on creatures and makes them better in the midsts of battle, but then you make them weaker again to draw cards? It is all just a little confusing. Unfortunately, as a result, my inner Vorthos is unsatisfied.
Polish - (2.5/3) Quality: The name of the city mentioned in the card name is spelled as "Paliano", not 'Palanio'. (0/2) Main Challenge: Unfortunately, just like bravelion83 mentioned, even if this card had been posted on time, it does not have a color identity, and thus would be disqualified anyway. Apologies. (2/2) Subchallenges: Both subchallenges were still met, however!
Total: 16.5/DQ
Final thoughts: While typically unmentioned, I believe that deadlines are indeed a universally key part of the any main challenge! Thank you for submitting a card anyway — your continued participation is still very much appreciated, at least in my opinion!
If your username has been bolded here, congratulations are in order — you have qualified for August MCC Round 3! Best of luck!
If your username has not been bolded here, there is always next month. Thank you for competing; best of luck next month!
Is it too late to submit my card? I thought the player deadline was Friday. :/
The judge deadline was Friday (and still is), the player's one was Tuesday. Anyway, you're lucky, as Blydden has offered to judge your card out of competition. For once, I will not have to do it myself!
EDIT: I also saw now that the card you posted was as artifact but not a colored one, so it would have failed the main challenge even if posted on time.
Swiftsilver Pike2W
Artifact - Equipment (U)
Flash
Equipped creature gets +1/+1 and has first strike. T: Attach Swiftsilver Pike to target creature you control.
Equip 1
Design (2.5/3) Appeal - I don't think Timmy cares that much, this makes creatures bigger but the P/T bonus is not the point of this card, it's just kind of a secondary point. Johnny, at the contrary, likes this card exactly for its intended purpose: there is so much he can do by passing this around at instant speed or exploiting the tapping cost. Spike also likes this very much, as using this card at the most of its potential requires quite a lot of skill. (2/3) Elegance - Less experienced players that incorrectly tap Auras and Equipment when the enchanted or equipped creature becomes tapped could be confused by this at first and might not play this correctly, but I actually see this as a learning occasion for them. That Auras and Equipment don't tap together with the creature is a thing they will have to learn sooner or later, so after the initial disorienting moment they will have learned more about how the game works, and that's a positive. After all, Flowstone Embrace and Second Wind saw print, even if in Future Sight (I know that's not the best precedent, but it's always better than Planar Chaos...).
Development (3/3) Viability - Everything is in color and rarity looks fine. I could see this printed as a rare today for complexity, but the precedents I just mentioned are common and uncommon. Again, I know that Future Sight doesn't make for the best precedent. (1.5/3) Balance - This can be playable in limited as a kind of on-board combat trick, but I don't think it would be a high pick. In Standard, I can see this in specific decks, where you take advantage of passing around the Equipment at instant speed or you have a combo that involves this. I can't see this in older formats. Except for what I've already mentioned in Elegance, I see no other problems in casual or multiplayer.
Creativity (3/3) Uniqueness - An Equipment that taps, no need to say more. (1.5/3) Flavor - The name is fine and fits the mechanics well. No flavor text even though MSE tells me there would have been room for a couple lines.
Polish (3/3) Quality - All good. (2/2) Main Challenge - Good. (2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Cogwork Researcher1UR
Artifact Creature - Construct (R) T, Discard an artifact card: Draw a card.
Sacrifice Cogwork Researcher: Return another target artifact card from your graveyard to your hand. "Some say that Muzzio's vast network of cogwork servants serves simply to run his Academy. Others think he has... loftier goals."
—Sevaril, High City Informant
1/4
Design (2.5/3) Appeal - Nothing for Timmy here. At the contrary, there is so much for Johnny: this both helps him dig into his library for combo pieces and can also be a combo piece itself thanks to the sacrifice ability. He just loves this card. Spike also apprieciates the looting and potential card advantage, but this is clearly a card made for Johnny. (3/3) Elegance - Exemplar card in this regard: very easy to understand, short and clean. Very good job here!
Development (3/3) Viability - Both blue and red are allowed to interact with artifacts in a number of ways. I appreciate the balance of colors here: the first ability feels more red as it's a twist on the red variant of looting with discard first, the second more blue even if I could also see a red card doing that, but regrowing artifacts has historically been more in blue than red. As for rarity, at first I saw this as a potential uncommon too, but then I thought about the looting being very easily repeatable in an artifact deck (and there are pleanty of those in various formats) and now I definitely agree with this card being rare. (3/3) Balance - How glad am I that the word "another" is there in the second ability! A single word changes the card from potentially broken to quite balanced. The looting ability doesn't worry me particularly as you need a lot of artifacts and there is a tapping cost that naturally restricts this to one use per turn cycle (under ordinary conditions). It's true that it's quite strong in artifact decks like Affinity in Modern for example. It's certainly playable in limited too, and also in Standard artifact decks in environments where they are viable. I see no problems in casual and multiplayer.
Creativity (1/3) Uniqueness - A twist on looting, but there is nothing particularly original on this card. (3/3) Flavor - The name is fine and the flavor text is really good. I could easily see both those elements being actually printed as is (obviously if the Academy wasn't actually closed, but I didn't know that yet as I was planning this month's challenges).
Polish (3/3) Quality - All good. (2/2) Main Challenge - Good. (2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Muzzio’s Mechamage1UR
Artifact Creature – Wizard Construct (U)
When Muzzio’s Mechamage enters the battlefield, if you didn't cast it from your hand, put a +1/+1 counter on Muzzio's Mechamage and it gains haste until end of turn.
: Muzzio’s Mechamage’s converted mana cost becomes 6 until end of turn. "They need only to appear powerful to ensure I truly will be."
— Muzzio, Vice Chancellor
2/3
Design (2/3) Appeal - This is a pure Johnny card, he will have a lot of fun figuring how to best use both abilities but especially the CMC-changing one. There might be some value for Spike in the first ability, but nothing that excites him. Timmy just doesn't care. (1.5/3) Elegance - The two abilities really feel disconnected from one another unless you consider Muzzio, Visionary Architect. The first ability pushes you towards some kind of unearth-like interactions, while the other pushes you towards things that check CMC of permanents on the battlefield (as this ability only works on the battlefield, you won't be able to change its CMC on the stack or in the library where it would be relevant for things like, for example, Riddle of Lightning). This card pushes you in two different directions, thus leaving you disoriented at first. The two abilities would make two perfect cards each by itself in this regard. This all changes when you bring in Muzzio's card, as then you realize that the two abilities are meant to sinergize with him, and they wonderfully do. It's just that you have to know about Muzzio's card for this card to make sense, and while I, as an 11-year player, should have catched this on the first iteration of this judgment, a newer player that started playing after (or anyway didn't play with) the original Conspiracy set won't still get it.
Also, the CMC-changing ability might have a lot of hidden implications in both rules and strategy. That ability is very complex, even more than it looks at first.
Development (1/3) Viability - No problems with the first ability. I don't even know if the CMC-changing one would work at all in the rules (I honestly doubt it but I don't have proof for now), and anyway even if it does I can't see it at uncommon. It would at least need to be rare for complexity, but this looks also splashy enough to potentially justify it being mythic in my opinion. That ability is so out there that I'm also not able to define what colors it would belong to, so I won't object to your choice of blue and red in this regard. Overall, I'm honestly very skeptical about that ability. That doesn't mean it can't be done, but it looks like playing with fire to me. (2/3) Balance - If this didn't have the CMC-changing ability, it would be balanced well enough: it looks fine as a 2/3 for three mana that can be a 3/4 with haste in some corner cases but requires external help to achieve that status as it doesn't have any in-built way to do so. Again, the CMC-changing ability is so out there that it's really difficult to judge whether it's balanced as is. It probably depends on the environment, in particular if there are things that take advantage of it and how many. Assuming there are no problems with that ability, it's certainly playable in limited, and if you have ways to make this get the +1/+1 counter and haste reliably maybe in Standard too. I can't see this in older formats, unless some combo is discovered that exploits the last ability. Its high complexity can also potentially be a problem in casual. In multiplayer, and Conspiracy draft in particular, this has a very good interaction with the aforementioned Muzzio's card, that will come up if someone has the idea of drafting the two Conspiracy sets together, something that I totally expect will be done by someone somewhere (all this under the hypothesis that this round's cards are meant to be in Take the Crown).
Creativity (3/3) Uniqueness - You'd deserve even more than maximum points here for that CMC-changing ability. (3/3) Flavor - The name is fine and the flavor text is really good. I could easily see both those elements being actually printed as is (obviously if the Academy wasn't actually closed, but I didn't know that yet as I was planning this month's challenges).
Polish (2.5/3) Quality - There should be no space between the long dash and the name in the flavor text attribution (half a point deducted). (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.)
The judge deadline was Friday (and still is), the player's one was Tuesday. Anyway, you're lucky, as Blydden has offered to judge your card out of competition. For once, I will not have to do it myself!
EDIT: I also saw now that the card you posted was as artifact but not a colored one, so it would have failed the main challenge even if posted on time.
Lol, just now realised I made it colourless. Thanks for originally considering the late entry though, I'll be back next month.
Appeal: I'm not really sure who this is supposed to appeal to, but it does please Johnny and Spike fairly well. Timmy, on the other hand, won't give it a second glance.
2/3 Elegance: Nothing difficult to understand, and all the aspects of the card fit well together.
3/3
Total: 5/6 Development
Viability: It seems odd to me that a blue artifact would give your guys prowess, but it's not too out there. Second ability is obviously on colour and the rarity is totally fine.
2.5/3 Balance: I don't see it being that bad in any format, and to be honest, I think it would probably only come up in limited most of the time (barring a weird combo deck in standard/new tech for storm combo).
3/3
Total: 5.5/6 Creativity
Uniqueness: As far as I know, this is the only artifact that grants an ability to all of your creatures, plus it's the only artifact that gives you mana when you play stuff. Super interesting and unique.
3/3 Flavour: This is the only bit that is a bit iffy. The whole flavour of the card is good, except the prowess bit... Reading the flavour text makes it sound like it should draw cards, not give you a bonus in combat. Maybe an image might help, I'm not sure.
1.5/3
Total: 4.5/6 Polish
Quality: No errors that I can see.
3/3 Main Challenge: Satisfied.
2/2 Subchallenges: CMC 3 or less, but no tap ability.
1/2
Total: 6/7 Total: 21/25
Design
Appeal: This is a Timmy card, but it's good enough to make Spike very interested as well. Johnny migh find a way to get lots of counters on it, but it's unlikely to be too abuseable.
2.5/3 Elegance: Everything on here is clearly understandable, and the abilities play off of each other nicely. My only caveat is that I wish there were a way to combine the first two abilities into one line.
2.5/3
Total: 5/6 Development
Viability: Power level aside, I don't see any reason why this wouldn't be printed. Colour is fine, and mythic is perfect for this type of card. The only issue is how wordy it is, so a point off there.
2/3 Balance: The only comparable card to this is Umezawa's Jitte, and comparing your card to one of the most powerful artifacts ever printed isn't a great starting point. Mana costs and equip costs are the same, Blackblade is a bit more restrictive, the buff is smaller, but it's permanent, and the longer the game goes on, the more difficult it is to deal with. The one thing I think that makes this noticeably worse is the tap requirement (and I think it should make you tap the creature, not the equipment), but "noticeably worse than Jitte" still makes for an extremely powerful card. It's not as oppressive, but if I saw this card in pack three, I would probably switch colours just to play it, and that's not a great place to be.
1.5/3
Total: 3.5/6 Creativity
Uniqueness: You lose points here too, due to the similarity to Jitte. It is an interesting take on the idea, however, so not too bad.
1.5/3 Flavour: The flavour is where this card really shines. Just thinking about it makes me wish I could use this as a super-flavourful EDH general... unfortunately Commander doesn't work that way... *cri*.
3/3
Total: 4.5/6 Polish
Quality: Third ability reads "creatures" instead of "creature." I won't take points off for it, cause most people aren't aware of the templating for this, but the first two abilities should be switched. A card will always include the ability that puts a special type of counter on it before the ability that tells you what those counters do. No spelling or grammar errors.
2.5/3 Main Challenge: Satisfied.
2/2 Subchallenges: Both satisfied.
2/2
Total: 6.5/7 Total: 19.5/25
Design
Appeal: Very much a Timmy card, although Johnny will probably find a use for it (I mean, can you say Hellkite Charger...?) Spike probably doesn't care at all outside of limited, where it's good enough that you'd be crazy not to want it.
2.5/3 Elegance: Very simple and elegant design, and trample + combat damage pairing is nice. Overall, feels solid.
3/3
Total: 5.5/6 Development
Viability: I can see this seeing print. It's a bit like a mono-green version of Sword of Feast and Famine. Colour is good, I would probably advocate for this at mythic though.
2.5/3 Balance: My points here are going to be much the same as what I said to Freyleyes: It's a slightly less powerful version of one of the most broken equipment in the game. However, I think that the quadruple green and lack of protection makes this card much more balanced with respect to its predecessor. The trample is enough to set off alarm bells in limited, but I think bumping it to mythic would mitigate most of that issue, though it is still a "resolve = win" most of the time.
2/3
Total: 4.5/6 Creativity
Uniqueness: Again, very similar to Sword of Feast and Famine, but different enough to feel interesting.
1.5/3 Flavour: The flavour here is pretty cool, although I have to be honest, I've never understood why scythes gave a toughness boost. It feels very much like a weapon that should only increase power.
3/3
Total: 4.5/6 Polish
Quality: No errors here.
3/3 Main Challenge: Satisfied.
2/2 Subchallenges: CMC 3, but no tap ability.
1/2
Total: 6/7 Total: 20.5/25
Design
Appeal: Timmy doesn't care, Spike might be interested, but needs some convincing. Johnny loves it.
2/3 Elegance: Requires a bit of rereading if you only initially skim the text, but nothing too overcomplicated. Overall, the card is well concieved and well executed.
2/3
Total: 4/6 Development
Viability: The colour and rarity is good here. The card itself is a bit wordy, and having both abilities make the card feel very pushed.
2/3 Balance: I would expect to see something in Afinnity banned immediately after this card was printed. If it cost three, then it might be better, but the fact that you can drop this on turn 2 and start churning out ridiculous numbers of tokens is a definite concern. The problem with this is that is extremely insular. Either it's in an artifact-centric deck/set and it's insane, or it isn't, and it's completely worthless. Add on the fact that it's a repeatable tutor for three mana, and it can't be targeted by removal and you have what I would consider to be an unbalanced card in almost every single format.
0.5/3
Total: 2.5/6 Creativity
Uniqueness: This is definitely a very unique card, and I think that is the real strong point of the design.
3/3 Flavour: The flavour is pretty cool here. The only issue that I have is: how do baby artifact birds reproduce? They'd have to grow up before they can make more hatchlings...
2.9999/3
Total: 6/6 Polish
Quality: No problems here.
3/3 Main Challenge: Satisfied.
2/2 Subchallenges: Both satisfied.
2/2
Total: 7/7 Total: 19.5/25
1 - thenoodler: 21/25 2 - Jimmy Groove: 20.5/25
ickiwonkin: 19.5/25
Freyleyes: 19.5/25
Can I say... wow. SUPER close scores. Anyways, good luck to those of you who proceed onwards, and to the rest of you, don't be discouraged! All of the entries this round were great, and I'm sure you'll have your time in the spotlight if you persist at it. heh.
(This month's banner is my own elaboration on the art of the card Paliano, The High City, by Adam Paquette)
August MCC Round 2
"Masters of artifice"
In the story "Like Cogwork", we get to know Muzzio and his apprentice Irie, and we get to see how Muzzio becomes Vice Chancellor at the Academy of Paliano. As always on Fiora, the means are questionable to say the least... Anyway, Muzzio learned from Daretti the ways of artifice and now his constructs perform all kinds of services for the people of Paliano, while secretly recording potentially useful information for their master of course...
Main challenge: Design a colored artifact. It may be an artifact creature but also a noncreature artifact.
This is meant to represent one of Muzzio's or Daretti's designs.
Subchallenges:
1- The card has an activated ability with T in its activation cost.
2- The card has a converted mana cost of 3 or less.
The card has to have colored mana in its mana cost. Having only generic mana in the mana cost but colored mana in the rules text does NOT count. Hybrid mana and Phyrexian mana are ok, provided they have at least one colored part.
For subchallenge 1, the activated ability can have any other additional costs in addition to the tap symbol. Those additional costs can be both mana costs and/or all kinds of non-mana costs.
If you have any more doubts, just ask, preferably in the discussion thread.
Also, please take note of the following points.
On rarity and formatting:
You can read my latest article about my opinion on this matter.
On the use of "create" vs. "put onto the battlefield" for tokens. This is an official ruling for this month.
(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: Tuesday, August 16th 23:59 EDT
Judge deadline: Friday, August 19th 23:59 EDT
JUDGES
bravelion83
Voxzorz
Necarg
Blydden
PLAYERS
admirableadmiral
doomfish
Flatline
Folza
Freyleyes
Ghosting
IcariiFA
ickiwonkin
Jimmy Groove
netn10
Sagharri
scrad_the_wanderer
sperlman
sunshinesoldier
thenoodler
willows
Only the above players are allowed to submit a card this round. Good luck everyone!
BRACKETS
Ghosting and scrad_the_wanderer did not submit a card, so we have two brackets with three players.
Judge: bravelion83
doomfish
sperlman
sunshinesoldier
Judge: Voxzorz
Freyleyes
ickiwonkin
Jimmy Groove
thenoodler
Judge: Necarg
Flatline
Folza
netn10
willows
Judge: Blydden
admirableadmiral
IcariiFA
Sagharri
Top 2 from each bracket advance to round 3 (aka the versus round).
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.)
Legendary Artifact (R)
Whenever an opponent casts a spell, put an observation counter on Golboz, Eye of the Network.
Remove X observation counters from Golboz, T : Gain control of target nonland permanent with a converted mana cost X or less until end of turn. Untap it.
The more it sees, the better it understands what to take.
Artifact [R]
You can't search your library.
t: Add R to your mana pool.
"The worst thing you can do is have too many ideas at once."
—Daretti, Scrap Savant
Artifact Creature — Drone (U)
Flying, hexproof
: Until end of turn, creatures with hexproof can be the targets of spells and abilities as though they didn't have hexproof.
By the time the search light is on you, it's usually too late.
0/2
Artifact Creature - Homunculus (Rare)
You may draw cards from the bottom of your library instead from the top.
t: Scry X, where X's the number of artifacts you control.
It has one eye, yet it may see infinate possibilities.
0/1
Legendary Artifact - Equipment {M}
Equipped creature gets +X/+X for each soul counter on Blackblade.
Whenever equipped creature deals combat damage, put a soul counter on Blackblade.
T, Remove X soul counters from Blackblade: Target creatures gets -X/-X until end of turn.
Equip 2
Dakkon's soul still lies dormant in Blackblade, bound eternally by Geyadrone Dihada.
Artifact Creature - Construct (R)
T, Discard an artifact card: Draw a card.
Sacrifice Cogwork Researcher: Return another target artifact card from your graveyard to your hand.
"Some say that Muzzio's vast network of cogwork servants serves simply to run his Academy. Others think he has... loftier goals."
—Sevaril, High City Informant
1/4
Artifact - Equipment (R)
Equipped creature gets +2/+2 and has trample.
Whenever equipped creature deals combat damage to a player, you may untap all lands you control.
Equip GG
Artifact Creature — Construct (U)
Flying
3, T: Choose target opponent. Scry X, where X is the number of artifacts that player controls.
When Surveillance Collector dies, draw a card.
1/2
Artifact Creature - Bird Construct (R)
Flying, hexproof
Whenever a nontoken artifact enters the battlefield under your control, create a 0/1 blue Bird Construct artifact creature token with flying and hexproof.
2U, , Sacrifice three artifacts: Search your library for an artifact card with converted mana cost 6 or greater, reveal that card and put it into your hand, then shuffle your library.
0/1
Artifact - Equipment (U)
Flash
Equipped creature gets +1/+1 and has first strike.
T: Attach Swiftsilver Pike to target creature you control.
Equip 1
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
Reconnaissance Thopter 1U
Artifact Creature - Thopter (R)
Flying, prowess
U, T: Target opponent reveals his or her hand. You may draw a card for each artifact
card revealed this way.
"A delightful contraption designed for accuracy, efficiency, and espionage."
- Muzzio, Vice Chancellor
2/2
BRACKETS
Ghosting and scrad_the_wanderer did not submit a card, so we have two brackets with three players.
Judge: bravelion83
doomfish
sperlman
sunshinesoldier
Judge: Voxzorz
Freyleyes
ickiwonkin
Jimmy Groove
thenoodler
Judge: Necarg
Flatline
Folza
netn10
willows
Judge: Blydden
admirableadmiral
IcariiFA
Sagharri
Top 2 from each bracket advance to round 3 (aka the versus round).
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.)
Justttt in case, although I understand if it is too late:
High Palanio Spyglass 3
Artifact (U)
Whenever a creature enters the battlefield under your control, if a land also entered the battlefield under your control this turn, put a +1/+1 counter on that creature.
T, Remove a +1/+1 counter from target creature: Draw a card.
"If you're not paying, you're the product."
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
I thought that would be the case, totally understandable. Good luck to everyone.
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
(2.5/3) Appeal: A power nine reprint? Well, all three player types are immediately excited for the possibility of a possibly rebalanced Mox Ruby.
However, being unable to search your library is primarily a Johnny problem and secondarily a Timmy problem (can't search for lands). Spike thrives under pressure, however.
(3/3) Elegance: Well, this is a card that simply does exactly what it says.
Development -
(1.5/3) Viability: With hardly a doubt, this card is definitely red, since it is a mana accelerant. It also prohibits library searching, which is something that red does the least of out of all colors already. This card at first looks like a 'build around me' card, yet that is not quite true. It could be put into virtually any red deck and do well, but that is more a balance issue.
The rarity is also techically correct, but I believe this card would have done better conceptually as a mythic rare legendary artifact. Its intended power level is just so high.
Finally, there can be no doubt that this card would warp any limited block in its current state, even at rare. It would also require a specific limited block where the drawback was actually meaningful enough for its color.
(0/3) Balance: This card was clearly intended to be balanced on a knife's edge, but unbalanced is the only word that I immediately have for it. One of Magic's more recent directions is towards slower mana acceleration (R.I.P. Llanowar Elves), and this is definitely faster and more difficult to remove than the aforementioned card, color shifted or otherwise. On the first turn that it is played (which can be turn 1), it is a 0 mana artifact that reads 'You can't search your library.' After that, it is Mox Ruby except for the minor downside.
This is not a problem in mono-red unless you have a specific need to play Sarkhan's Triumph (a.k.a. Draconic Tutor), but you would definitely run this card over that one, and even if not, you could theoretically just do your library searching and then play this card afterwards. Simply put, this card's downside does not at all equal 1, which this card otherwise needs plus the drawback, then this would actually result in an interesting counterpart to Fire Diamond (yet maybe still a little too strong). Especially since you could play multiples of this at once without the drawback meaningfully stacking. The drawback provides untapped design space, but I believe that belongs elsewhere and not on a mana accelerant like this. Searching your library in limited is rarer unlike in standard, so this card would bring even more havoc to that format in particular. As for casual, it is typically not fun to get rushed down by an accelerated mono-red deck. This is less of a problem in multiplayer due to politics, where this card 'might' be plausible.
Creativity -
(2.5/3) Uniqueness: It feels very weird to give a power nine reprint a near-perfect uniqueness score, but I literally could not think of nor find an official card with the words "You can't search your library". Not a single one. Congratulations. One of the closest cards that our judge panel altogether could find was a card from Future Sight: Aven Mindcensor.
(2.5/3) Flavor: I am not really sure as to how this name and that flavor text go together for Vorthos, but they both make sense, and this card definitely feels red.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Perfect!
(2/2) Main Challenge: Main challenge met!
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both subchallenges met!
Total: 19/25
Final thought: Ah, development, how it is the downfall of innumerable card designs.
(3/3) Appeal: This card is definitely appealing to all three of the player psychographics. It is a big effect for Timmy, a neat card to build with for Johnny, and a useful card to play with for Spike. Bravo!
(3/3) Elegance: This card could theoretically give the target haste until end of turn, but I believe that it would indeed require red in its cost to do that, which has been rightly left out when considering the mana cost. As a result, this card definitely does what it does.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: In the right sort of artifact-focused block, this sort of legendary artifact could definitely find a place. It is rare, so it will definitely be more of a show-stopper in limited and otherwise less of a headache there. It feels unnecessary to mention that blue is the primary ruler of effects that change control of permanents, but there you are.
(3/3) Balance: Okay, so for the same converted mana cost as Act of Treason, you can cast this instead. The upsides to doing so are that you can take control of any (nonland) permanent, not just creatures (enchantments or other artifacts also fall into this category), and it can be done at instant speed if necessary. The downsides include a delayed effect, a lack of haste, and susceptibility to artifact removal. This card is notably cheaper compared to other effects like it at the cost of being repeatable yet temporary. So, this card is adaptable, too!
In addition, this card takes skill to play versus but it is definitely not impossible. All the opponent has to do is stay on curve, and their biggest creature will typically be just out of reach of this card's effect. Thus, quite a bit of fun, similar to trying to prevent werewolves from transforming, is created as a result!
Oh, by the way, this card is clearly just a ridiculous amount of fun in casual and multiplayer. It is amazing what giving a delay to a powerful effect can do for game health and enjoyment!
Notably, this card definitely has the potential to be almost like a limited bomb in any limited format (due to a lack of artifact removal), but rares are allowed to do that as far as I am concerned.
Creativity -
(2/3) Uniqueness: Blue gaining control of other permanents is iconic, but artifacts doing the same is actually rather unique. Good job.
(3/3) Flavor: The flavor here is spot on. This card just has that wonderful legendary feel without even needing to be a creature.
Polish -
(2.5/3) Quality: Just a couple minor qualitative errors here. In the phrase 'with a converted mana cost X or less', the "a" is redundant and should be nixed. Otherwise, the only other error is an unnecessary space between the tap symbol and the colon (yes I noticed that).
(2/2) Main Challenge: Main challenge met!
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both subchallenges met!
Total: 23.5/25
Final thoughts: This card actually took me on a bit of a wild ride as I was judging it. First, I thought that it could be too strong, then I thought that it could actually be on the weak side...it was actually just right in its execution.
(0.5/3) Appeal: This is a rather small and bland effect, unfortunately. Tammy is bored and so is Spike. Only for Jenny is this card maybe worthwhile, but there is nothing to be ecstatic about.
(2.5/3) Elegance: This card could definitely benefit from some flavor text, but it otherwise does exactly what it says that it does. However, it is just a little weird that you need to tap this noncreature artifact and then put it on top of your library.
Development -
(2/3) Viability: For such a simple and approachable effect, I see no reason that this card could not be common instead. White's weakness as a color is also card drawing, and exacerbating that weakness while trying to play a card like this feels rather unnecessary.
(0/3) Balance: This card feels like a missed opportunity in terms of limited and pauper gameplay. For W, you can play this card or Suntail Hawk. The reason to play this card over its counterpart is for artifact-based effects like Artificer's Epiphany and the like. However, this effect just very overcosted. Either pay 2 along with the tap, and then you have a cheap token engine that may possibly be worth an uncommon slot in a block. Or, nix the mana cost and tapping in order to keep the intriguing part of this simplistic card.
Even better than putting this card on top of your library in that case may be just to sacrifice it. As a result, it could serve as delve and delirium fodder in the graveyard rather than possibly costing a valuable draw during the following turn.
Even in the edge case of using this card to prevent oneself from being milled to death, there are better artifact cards for that very purpose like Epitaph Golem.
I mean, this card is fine, if ignorable, in any format or casual. There are just better cheap artifacts.
Creativity -
(1.5/3) Uniqueness: White already likes to make flying tokens, be they spirits or birds or the like. Putting this card on the top of your library is intriguing, but it has been done before.
(1.5/3) Flavor: There is no flavor text here despite the card having plenty of room for it. Otherwise, what flavor there is makes reasonable sense.
Polish -
(2.5/3) Quality: Admittedly, create is a very new form of wording. I believe that either an 'a' or a 'one' or a similar word is missing between the terms 'Create' and '1/1'. (Here is the link to the 'create' promotional card for reference.)
(2/2) Main Challenge: Main challenge met!
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both subchallenges met!
Total: 14.5/25
Final thought: I believe that this card nevertheless had quite a bit of flavorful potential with a myriad of possible flavor texts and card arts.
(2/3) Appeal: This card is generically useful enough to appeal to everyone without particularly exciting everyone. It makes creatures bigger, draws cards, and may require a bit of skill to play with in some cases. Unfortunately, this card is broadly appealing but not deeply exciting.
(2.5/3) Elegance: This card has certain requirements including timely land drops and numerous instances of +1/+1 counter management, but nothing extremely inelegant.
Development -
(2/3) Viability: This card pleasantly reminds me of landfall, but it was correct to leave out that ability word on this card. The triggers are similar, but different.
This card is possibly worthy of rare since it can reliably buff up any color of creature, however. This is the sort of artifact that needs a color identity.
(2/3) Balance: Continuing from above, the color identity that meshes with this card the best is green. It cares about land drops, buffs creatures, and uses buffs to draw cards. As such, this card mechanically could comfortably cost about 2G. The converted mana cost of about 3 is still correct, however. If this card really needed to remain colorless, 4 might be a better mana cost, or it could require 1 along with the tap in order to draw a card.
As a colorless artifact, there is a degree of concern that this effect could get out of control in certain cases, particularly in cases involving tokens.
Otherwise, this card plays well in all formats and provides another interesting use for +1/+1 counters. Again, though, requiring 1 along with the tap for the card drawing effect may be advisable to stay on the safer side.
Creativity -
(2/3) Uniqueness: These sort of effects have been done before, but this combination is an interesting way to do it all at once.
(1.5/3) Flavor: This card feels a little all over the place in terms of flavor. So, it is a spyglass that spies on creatures and makes them better in the midsts of battle, but then you make them weaker again to draw cards? It is all just a little confusing. Unfortunately, as a result, my inner Vorthos is unsatisfied.
Polish -
(2.5/3) Quality: The name of the city mentioned in the card name is spelled as "Paliano", not 'Palanio'.
(0/2) Main Challenge: Unfortunately, just like bravelion83 mentioned, even if this card had been posted on time, it does not have a color identity, and thus would be disqualified anyway. Apologies.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both subchallenges were still met, however!
Total: 16.5/DQ
Final thoughts: While typically unmentioned, I believe that deadlines are indeed a universally key part of the any main challenge! Thank you for submitting a card anyway — your continued participation is still very much appreciated, at least in my opinion!
admirableadmiral - 19
Sagharri - 14.5
If your username has been bolded here, congratulations are in order — you have qualified for August MCC Round 3! Best of luck!
If your username has not been bolded here, there is always next month. Thank you for competing; best of luck next month!
The judge deadline was Friday (and still is), the player's one was Tuesday. Anyway, you're lucky, as Blydden has offered to judge your card out of competition. For once, I will not have to do it myself!
EDIT: I also saw now that the card you posted was as artifact but not a colored one, so it would have failed the main challenge even if posted on time.
Judgments complete, not final until deadline.
Design
(2.5/3) Appeal - I don't think Timmy cares that much, this makes creatures bigger but the P/T bonus is not the point of this card, it's just kind of a secondary point. Johnny, at the contrary, likes this card exactly for its intended purpose: there is so much he can do by passing this around at instant speed or exploiting the tapping cost. Spike also likes this very much, as using this card at the most of its potential requires quite a lot of skill.
(2/3) Elegance - Less experienced players that incorrectly tap Auras and Equipment when the enchanted or equipped creature becomes tapped could be confused by this at first and might not play this correctly, but I actually see this as a learning occasion for them. That Auras and Equipment don't tap together with the creature is a thing they will have to learn sooner or later, so after the initial disorienting moment they will have learned more about how the game works, and that's a positive. After all, Flowstone Embrace and Second Wind saw print, even if in Future Sight (I know that's not the best precedent, but it's always better than Planar Chaos...).
Development
(3/3) Viability - Everything is in color and rarity looks fine. I could see this printed as a rare today for complexity, but the precedents I just mentioned are common and uncommon. Again, I know that Future Sight doesn't make for the best precedent.
(1.5/3) Balance - This can be playable in limited as a kind of on-board combat trick, but I don't think it would be a high pick. In Standard, I can see this in specific decks, where you take advantage of passing around the Equipment at instant speed or you have a combo that involves this. I can't see this in older formats. Except for what I've already mentioned in Elegance, I see no other problems in casual or multiplayer.
Creativity
(3/3) Uniqueness - An Equipment that taps, no need to say more.
(1.5/3) Flavor - The name is fine and fits the mechanics well. No flavor text even though MSE tells me there would have been room for a couple lines.
Polish
(3/3) Quality - All good.
(2/2) Main Challenge - Good.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 20.5/25
Design
(2.5/3) Appeal - Nothing for Timmy here. At the contrary, there is so much for Johnny: this both helps him dig into his library for combo pieces and can also be a combo piece itself thanks to the sacrifice ability. He just loves this card. Spike also apprieciates the looting and potential card advantage, but this is clearly a card made for Johnny.
(3/3) Elegance - Exemplar card in this regard: very easy to understand, short and clean. Very good job here!
Development
(3/3) Viability - Both blue and red are allowed to interact with artifacts in a number of ways. I appreciate the balance of colors here: the first ability feels more red as it's a twist on the red variant of looting with discard first, the second more blue even if I could also see a red card doing that, but regrowing artifacts has historically been more in blue than red. As for rarity, at first I saw this as a potential uncommon too, but then I thought about the looting being very easily repeatable in an artifact deck (and there are pleanty of those in various formats) and now I definitely agree with this card being rare.
(3/3) Balance - How glad am I that the word "another" is there in the second ability! A single word changes the card from potentially broken to quite balanced. The looting ability doesn't worry me particularly as you need a lot of artifacts and there is a tapping cost that naturally restricts this to one use per turn cycle (under ordinary conditions). It's true that it's quite strong in artifact decks like Affinity in Modern for example. It's certainly playable in limited too, and also in Standard artifact decks in environments where they are viable. I see no problems in casual and multiplayer.
Creativity
(1/3) Uniqueness - A twist on looting, but there is nothing particularly original on this card.
(3/3) Flavor - The name is fine and the flavor text is really good. I could easily see both those elements being actually printed as is (obviously if the Academy wasn't actually closed, but I didn't know that yet as I was planning this month's challenges).
Polish
(3/3) Quality - All good.
(2/2) Main Challenge - Good.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 22.5/25
This judgment has been reviewed.
Design
(2/3) Appeal - This is a pure Johnny card, he will have a lot of fun figuring how to best use both abilities but especially the CMC-changing one. There might be some value for Spike in the first ability, but nothing that excites him. Timmy just doesn't care.
(1.5/3) Elegance - The two abilities really feel disconnected from one another unless you consider Muzzio, Visionary Architect. The first ability pushes you towards some kind of unearth-like interactions, while the other pushes you towards things that check CMC of permanents on the battlefield (as this ability only works on the battlefield, you won't be able to change its CMC on the stack or in the library where it would be relevant for things like, for example, Riddle of Lightning). This card pushes you in two different directions, thus leaving you disoriented at first. The two abilities would make two perfect cards each by itself in this regard. This all changes when you bring in Muzzio's card, as then you realize that the two abilities are meant to sinergize with him, and they wonderfully do. It's just that you have to know about Muzzio's card for this card to make sense, and while I, as an 11-year player, should have catched this on the first iteration of this judgment, a newer player that started playing after (or anyway didn't play with) the original Conspiracy set won't still get it.
Also, the CMC-changing ability might have a lot of hidden implications in both rules and strategy. That ability is very complex, even more than it looks at first.
Development
(1/3) Viability - No problems with the first ability. I don't even know if the CMC-changing one would work at all in the rules (I honestly doubt it but I don't have proof for now), and anyway even if it does I can't see it at uncommon. It would at least need to be rare for complexity, but this looks also splashy enough to potentially justify it being mythic in my opinion. That ability is so out there that I'm also not able to define what colors it would belong to, so I won't object to your choice of blue and red in this regard. Overall, I'm honestly very skeptical about that ability. That doesn't mean it can't be done, but it looks like playing with fire to me.
(2/3) Balance - If this didn't have the CMC-changing ability, it would be balanced well enough: it looks fine as a 2/3 for three mana that can be a 3/4 with haste in some corner cases but requires external help to achieve that status as it doesn't have any in-built way to do so. Again, the CMC-changing ability is so out there that it's really difficult to judge whether it's balanced as is. It probably depends on the environment, in particular if there are things that take advantage of it and how many. Assuming there are no problems with that ability, it's certainly playable in limited, and if you have ways to make this get the +1/+1 counter and haste reliably maybe in Standard too. I can't see this in older formats, unless some combo is discovered that exploits the last ability. Its high complexity can also potentially be a problem in casual. In multiplayer, and Conspiracy draft in particular, this has a very good interaction with the aforementioned Muzzio's card, that will come up if someone has the idea of drafting the two Conspiracy sets together, something that I totally expect will be done by someone somewhere (all this under the hypothesis that this round's cards are meant to be in Take the Crown).
Creativity
(3/3) Uniqueness - You'd deserve even more than maximum points here for that CMC-changing ability.
(3/3) Flavor - The name is fine and the flavor text is really good. I could easily see both those elements being actually printed as is (obviously if the Academy wasn't actually closed, but I didn't know that yet as I was planning this month's challenges).
Polish
(2.5/3) Quality - There should be no space between the long dash and the name in the flavor text attribution (half a point deducted).
(2/2) Main Challenge - Good.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 19/25
sperlman: 22.5
doomfish: 20.5
sunshinesoldier: 19
MCC - Winner (6): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019 || Host (15): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here) || Judge (34): every month from Nov 2014 to Nov 2016 except Oct 2015, every month from Feb to Jul 2017 except Apr 2017, then Oct 2017, May Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here)
CCL - Winner (3): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last one here) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016
DCC - Winner (1): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar) || Host (3): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016
• The two public custom sets I've been part a part of the design team for:
"Brotherhood of Ormos" - Blog post with all info - set thread - design skeleton / card list || "Extinctia: Homo Evanuit" - Blog post with all info - set thread - card list spreadsheet
• "The Lion's Lair", my article series about MTG and custom card design in particular. Latest article here. Here is the article index. Rather outdated by now, and based on the old MCC rubric, but I'm leaving this here for anybody that might be interested anyway.
• My only public attempt at being a writer: the story of my Leonin custom planeswalker Jeff Lionheart. (I have a very big one that I'm working on right now but that's private for now, and I don't know if I will ever actually publish it, and I also have ideas for multiple future ones, including one where I'm going to reprise Jeff.)
Lol, just now realised I made it colourless. Thanks for originally considering the late entry though, I'll be back next month.
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
Design
Appeal: I'm not really sure who this is supposed to appeal to, but it does please Johnny and Spike fairly well. Timmy, on the other hand, won't give it a second glance.
2/3
Elegance: Nothing difficult to understand, and all the aspects of the card fit well together.
3/3
Total: 5/6
Development
Viability: It seems odd to me that a blue artifact would give your guys prowess, but it's not too out there. Second ability is obviously on colour and the rarity is totally fine.
2.5/3
Balance: I don't see it being that bad in any format, and to be honest, I think it would probably only come up in limited most of the time (barring a weird combo deck in standard/new tech for storm combo).
3/3
Total: 5.5/6
Creativity
Uniqueness: As far as I know, this is the only artifact that grants an ability to all of your creatures, plus it's the only artifact that gives you mana when you play stuff. Super interesting and unique.
3/3
Flavour: This is the only bit that is a bit iffy. The whole flavour of the card is good, except the prowess bit... Reading the flavour text makes it sound like it should draw cards, not give you a bonus in combat. Maybe an image might help, I'm not sure.
1.5/3
Total: 4.5/6
Polish
Quality: No errors that I can see.
3/3
Main Challenge: Satisfied.
2/2
Subchallenges: CMC 3 or less, but no tap ability.
1/2
Total: 6/7
Total: 21/25
Design
Appeal: This is a Timmy card, but it's good enough to make Spike very interested as well. Johnny migh find a way to get lots of counters on it, but it's unlikely to be too abuseable.
2.5/3
Elegance: Everything on here is clearly understandable, and the abilities play off of each other nicely. My only caveat is that I wish there were a way to combine the first two abilities into one line.
2.5/3
Total: 5/6
Development
Viability: Power level aside, I don't see any reason why this wouldn't be printed. Colour is fine, and mythic is perfect for this type of card. The only issue is how wordy it is, so a point off there.
2/3
Balance: The only comparable card to this is Umezawa's Jitte, and comparing your card to one of the most powerful artifacts ever printed isn't a great starting point. Mana costs and equip costs are the same, Blackblade is a bit more restrictive, the buff is smaller, but it's permanent, and the longer the game goes on, the more difficult it is to deal with. The one thing I think that makes this noticeably worse is the tap requirement (and I think it should make you tap the creature, not the equipment), but "noticeably worse than Jitte" still makes for an extremely powerful card. It's not as oppressive, but if I saw this card in pack three, I would probably switch colours just to play it, and that's not a great place to be.
1.5/3
Total: 3.5/6
Creativity
Uniqueness: You lose points here too, due to the similarity to Jitte. It is an interesting take on the idea, however, so not too bad.
1.5/3
Flavour: The flavour is where this card really shines. Just thinking about it makes me wish I could use this as a super-flavourful EDH general... unfortunately Commander doesn't work that way... *cri*.
3/3
Total: 4.5/6
Polish
Quality: Third ability reads "creatures" instead of "creature." I won't take points off for it, cause most people aren't aware of the templating for this, but the first two abilities should be switched. A card will always include the ability that puts a special type of counter on it before the ability that tells you what those counters do. No spelling or grammar errors.
2.5/3
Main Challenge: Satisfied.
2/2
Subchallenges: Both satisfied.
2/2
Total: 6.5/7
Total: 19.5/25
Design
Appeal: Very much a Timmy card, although Johnny will probably find a use for it (I mean, can you say Hellkite Charger...?) Spike probably doesn't care at all outside of limited, where it's good enough that you'd be crazy not to want it.
2.5/3
Elegance: Very simple and elegant design, and trample + combat damage pairing is nice. Overall, feels solid.
3/3
Total: 5.5/6
Development
Viability: I can see this seeing print. It's a bit like a mono-green version of Sword of Feast and Famine. Colour is good, I would probably advocate for this at mythic though.
2.5/3
Balance: My points here are going to be much the same as what I said to Freyleyes: It's a slightly less powerful version of one of the most broken equipment in the game. However, I think that the quadruple green and lack of protection makes this card much more balanced with respect to its predecessor. The trample is enough to set off alarm bells in limited, but I think bumping it to mythic would mitigate most of that issue, though it is still a "resolve = win" most of the time.
2/3
Total: 4.5/6
Creativity
Uniqueness: Again, very similar to Sword of Feast and Famine, but different enough to feel interesting.
1.5/3
Flavour: The flavour here is pretty cool, although I have to be honest, I've never understood why scythes gave a toughness boost. It feels very much like a weapon that should only increase power.
3/3
Total: 4.5/6
Polish
Quality: No errors here.
3/3
Main Challenge: Satisfied.
2/2
Subchallenges: CMC 3, but no tap ability.
1/2
Total: 6/7
Total: 20.5/25
Design
Appeal: Timmy doesn't care, Spike might be interested, but needs some convincing. Johnny loves it.
2/3
Elegance: Requires a bit of rereading if you only initially skim the text, but nothing too overcomplicated. Overall, the card is well concieved and well executed.
2/3
Total: 4/6
Development
Viability: The colour and rarity is good here. The card itself is a bit wordy, and having both abilities make the card feel very pushed.
2/3
Balance: I would expect to see something in Afinnity banned immediately after this card was printed. If it cost three, then it might be better, but the fact that you can drop this on turn 2 and start churning out ridiculous numbers of tokens is a definite concern. The problem with this is that is extremely insular. Either it's in an artifact-centric deck/set and it's insane, or it isn't, and it's completely worthless. Add on the fact that it's a repeatable tutor for three mana, and it can't be targeted by removal and you have what I would consider to be an unbalanced card in almost every single format.
0.5/3
Total: 2.5/6
Creativity
Uniqueness: This is definitely a very unique card, and I think that is the real strong point of the design.
3/3
Flavour: The flavour is pretty cool here. The only issue that I have is: how do baby artifact birds reproduce? They'd have to grow up before they can make more hatchlings...
2.9999/3
Total: 6/6
Polish
Quality: No problems here.
3/3
Main Challenge: Satisfied.
2/2
Subchallenges: Both satisfied.
2/2
Total: 7/7
Total: 19.5/25
1 - thenoodler: 21/25
2 - Jimmy Groove: 20.5/25
ickiwonkin: 19.5/25
Freyleyes: 19.5/25
Can I say... wow. SUPER close scores. Anyways, good luck to those of you who proceed onwards, and to the rest of you, don't be discouraged! All of the entries this round were great, and I'm sure you'll have your time in the spotlight if you persist at it. heh.
See you next round!