(A big thank you to bravelion83 for this banner, an elaboration on the art of these cards: Maelstrom Nexus by Steven Belledin and Maelstrom Wanderer by Thomas M. Baxa.)
September MCC Round 3
“Spacey Shards & Timey-Wimey Wedges”
Once again, welcome back to the September MCC! As of now, Ravnica is light-years behind us. Now, just ahead of us is...oh dear!
We appear to be at a fork in space-time! Fear not, I, Bly, your lovely tour guide, will expertly navigate us through this outrageous rift! Just as soon as you all help me figure out exactly how...
To our left is the scenic plane of Alara. Exalted knights, wondrous artifacts, unspeakable oddities, cultured cuisine, picturesque landscapes, all that and more await us there!
To our right is the pulchritudinous plane of Tarkir. Dragons, khans, clans, broods, and plenty more await us there as well!
This round, it is up to each of you to once again choose your colors once more while we are here! Forward!
Choose one of the following options. Please note your chosen option along with your entry!
Main Challenge: Design a card with three shard colors in its mana cost.
Sub Challenge 1: The card has a converted mana cost that is divisible by three.
Sub Challenge 2: The card has 'cycling' or 'cascade' in its rules text.
Main Challenge: Design a card with three wedge colors in its mana cost.
Sub Challenge 1: The card has a converted mana cost that is divisible by three.
Sub Challenge 2: The card has 'morph' or 'manifest' in its rules text.
As a quick reference, these are the shard colors. GWU (Bant) WUB (Esper) UBR (Grixis) BRG (Jund) RGW (Naya)
Basic landscycling is fine for the purposes of the second subchallenge.
As another quick reference, these are the wedge colors. WBG (Abzan) URW (Jeskai) BGU (Sultai) RWB (Mardu) GUR (Temur)
“Megamorph” is fine for the purposes of the second subchallenge. I recommend against using it and would prefer simply spelling out the +1/+1 counter(s) as an ‘is turned face up’ triggered ability (similarly to Hooded Hydra) out of viability concerns.
If you have any requests for further clarification, please do not hesitate to inquire, but preferably do so in the actual MCC Discussion Thread.
In addition, please take note of the following points.
A reminder to everyone: you're supposed to explicitly mention in your submission which option you've chosen. Please don't make us judges make extra work having to sort out who chose which option in our brackets before judging. Thanks.
On rarity and formatting (courtesy of bravelion83):
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/Johnny/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
DEADLINES* In green, the next deadline to come.
In blue, further future deadlines to come.
In red, past deadlines.
Player deadline: Saturday, September 24th 23:59 EDT
Judge deadline: Tuesday, September 27th 23:59 EDT
*Time extensions are infrequent but possible until the deadline is past.
JUDGES
Blydden
bravelion83
doomfish
Flatline
PLAYERS
Groovelord
Marco
netn10
RaikouRider
Raptorchan
sperlman
Vertain
Voxzorz
BRACKETS: The top two in each versus bracket advance to Round 4.
Blydden
Raptorchan vs. Voxzorz
Groovelord vs. Marco
bravelion83
Groovelord vs. Marco
netn10 vs. Vertain
doomfish
netn10 vs. Vertain
RaikouRider vs. sperlman
Flatline
RaikouRider vs. sperlman
Raptorchan vs. Voxzorz
Razdak, Invoker of MysteriesGUR
Legendary Creature - Human Shaman (Mythic)
When Razdak enters the battlefield, draw a card. GUR: Manifest a card from your hand. 3GUR: Turn target face down permanent you control face up. "Each land whispers a secret, and I am the one who listen."
2/4
Inviolable Gargantuan3RRGGWW
Creature -- Beast (M)
Cascade
Trample, vigilance
As long as Inviolable Gargantuan is on the stack or on the battlefield, spells, abilities and permanents you control can't be targeted by spells or abilities your opponents control.
8/8
Ethereal Crescendo3GUR
Enchantment (R)
At the beginning of your upkeep, manifest the top card of your library, then put a +1/+1 counter on target face-down creature. That creature gains haste until end of turn.
Sacrifice Ethereal Crescendo: Put a +1/+1 counter on each face-down creature you control. Whenever one or more face-down creatures you control deal combat damage to a player this turn, you may draw two cards. If you do, discard two cards.
All or Nothing6RWB
Enchantment (M)
When All or Nothing enters the battlefield, manifest all cards of your library.
Creatures you control have haste. Ordinary day for Mardu. Darkest hour for their foes.
Amesha of BrillianceGWU
Creature - Angel {R}
Flying
Cycling 3GWU (3GWU, Discard this card: Draw a card.)
When you cycle Amesha of Brilliance, return it from your graveyard to the battlefield. 3/4
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A mere ten days after the Mending, a young knight of Valeron and a young ranger of Eos made a discovery that would change Alara forever.
Varakna ScavengerBRG
Creature - Viashino Shaman (R)
Cycling 2 (2, Discard this card: Draw a card.)
Whenever you sacrifice a creature, you may pay 1. If you do, return Varakna Scavenger from your graveyard to your hand.
3/2
Evard, Vampire Overlord3UBR
Legendary Creature - Vampire Warrior (Mythic Rare)
Flying, haste
Whenever Evard, Vampire Overlord attacks an opponent, that player reveals his or her hand. You may put a creature card from it onto the battlefield tapped and attacking that opponent. Return that creature to its owner's hand at end of combat. (Return it only if it's on the battlefield.)
5/5
Inviolable Gargantuan3RRGGWW
Creature -- Beast (M)
Cascade
Trample, vigilance
As long as Inviolable Gargantuan is on the stack or on the battlefield, spells, abilities and permanents you control can't be targeted by spells or abilities your opponents control.
8/8
Design (2/3) Appeal - Talk about a card for Timmy! He loooooves this card! Costs too much for Spike to care. I don't see much for Johnny to do. (1/3) Elegance - The text is easy to understand, but there is one big problem here: the stack. We know mentioning the stack is one of the most confusing things you can do as a designer for many players. A lot of players, especially casual or newer ones, don't even know it exists, let alone how it works. Even though it's certainly a thing they will have to learn if they want to progress in the game, we still have to make sure the cards are understandable to everyone, including those players. It really pains me, but we enfranchised players have to remember we actually are a little minority of all the Magic players in the world, and the numbers Maro told us recently really hit me. I knew we were a minority, but I thought we were more than not even 1% of all Magic players...
Development (2/3) Viability - No problems with the color pie: cascade is in all five colors, trample in red and green, vigilance in green and white, uncounterability (the first half of the last ability) in red and green, and hexproof (the other half) in green. Rarity is definitely right: this is a perfect example of what a mythic should look like. There is an unwritten design rule this breaks though: "don't ever mention the stack" (see Elegance). (1.5/3) Balance - For such a high and restrictive cost, I can't see this being problematic anywhere. If you're able to cast this in limited (and that's a huge "if"), saying that it's a bomb is reductive. In competitive constructed you should have already won before you hit nine mana. In casual constructed, I could see this card being a huge success if it didn't mention the stack. Still, if there is a way to gently lead newer or less experienced players to learn more about the stack, it can be that of mentioning it on a card they will actively want to play. In multiplayer, this gets a huge target upon your head, which is not good from your point of view usually. It also suffices a single Day of Judgment or any untargeted removal to get rid of it, which is good for balancing this card, but the more opponents you have, the more likely it will be that they have it. Finally, there is an interesting thing about cascade: it will be hard to abuse it on this card, as to do that you would have to only have (up to four copies of) a single spell that costs less than nine mana in your deck. Just try to play a deck that is only lands, a single spell under nine mana, and all the rest costing 9+ mana... it doesn't sound that good of an idea. Cascade automatically gets more balanced the higher the CMC is, because you automatically have less control over what you get, and that kind of self-balancing is the interesting thing I wanted to mention.
Creativity (2/3) Uniqueness - The way this card works is original even though it's clearly very close to hexproof, which is evergreen. The mention of the stack is also something we don't see very often, by now I think the last time we saw it was in Time Spiral with split second, but that's for a reason (see Elegance). (1.5/3) Flavor - The name is fine and the concept of inviolability works very well with this card's mechanics. The word "Gargantuan" makes perfect sense too because what else would you call an 8/8 trampling vigilant Beast monster like this? If you don't include reminder text for cascade, up to two lines of flavor text could fit according to MSE. If you do, than this card's text is already at almost-microtext level, so no way it would fit. As this is a mythic, and so it does not absolutely have to include reminder text, I would have liked a short flavor text to be there.
Polish (1.5/3) Quality - Pay attention to the position of the cascade keyword on a card. If you look at all existing cards with cascade, you see that on instants and sorceries it comes first, but on permanents it always comes last (-0.5). Link to the relevant Gatherer search on the following line. You have to copy and paste it as links tags won't work because of the square brackets: http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?text= [cascade]
Also, not being an evergreen keyword, it would need reminder text under ordinary conditions, but here we have a mythic with an already crowded text box so it's one of those few cases where it's actually acceptable to leave it out.
Vigilance comes before trample, most recent examples: Tajuru Pathwarden from OGW and Werewolf of Ancient Hunger from SOI (-0.5). Finally, "can't be targeted by" should be "can't be the target of" (recent examples are Canopy Cover and Gaea's Revenge, -0.5). There would also be the double minus sign instead of a long dash in the type line, but there is nothing here that makes me aware you are not under the non-Latin characters restriction, so I have to give you the benefit of the doubt on that. (2/2) Main Challenge - Good. (2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 15.5/25
The mention of the stack has costed you a lot of points on my part. We still technically have to wait the other judge's results to see who's advancing, but I can tell you this card would have scored a lot better from me if its text box were:
Inviolable Gargantuan can't be countered.
Vigilance, trample, hexproof, cascade
Spells and abilities you control can't be countered by spells or abilities.
Other permanents you control have hexproof.
This is an almost-functionally-identical card that does not mention the stack. There can be corner cases (as always in Magic), but the reason why you might want to make your spells on the stack untargetable is only to avoid them being countered. I don't know for sure if this will cause your elimination, even though I honestly think it's very likely. If it does, I hope you had fun anyway and I hope to see you again next month. Prepare your best Kaladesh-inspired designs!
Evard, Vampire Overlord3UBR
Legendary Creature - Vampire Warrior (Mythic Rare)
Flying, haste
Whenever Evard, Vampire Overlord attacks an opponent, that player reveals his or her hand. You may put a creature card from it onto the battlefield tapped and attacking that opponent. Return that creature to its owner's hand at end of combat. (Return it only if it's on the battlefield.)
5/5
Design (3/3) Appeal - Timmy likes this, both for its stats and because of the visceral feeling of stealing a creature from his opponent's hand. Let's always remember that he doesn't just like huge creatures and spells. Well, he certainly does, but what he actually wants is to experience something. Johnny wants to express his cleverness instead, and he can do so here with some creative use of the stolen creature. After all, it only returns if it's on the battlefield, and who knows what might happen to it before it returns? For example, a Johnny/Spike hybrid would answer, it could get sacrificed! Play this with a Nantuko Husk or something like that and you get a strange mix of hand disruption and removal that both Johnny and Spike appreciate. (Now don't tell me I don't go in depth about the psychographics... ) (2.5/3) Elegance - A bit wordy but very easy to understand. It might have non-obvious strategic implications, but the reminder text helps a lot there.
Development (3/3) Viability - Flying is blue and secondary black, haste is red and secondary black, and the triggered ability is a mix between hand disruption, which is black, and a reverse Viashino Sandscout, which is red but could also make sense in black as it's known that card has been the inspiration for dash, the Kolaghan mechanic in FRF and DTK (I remember Maro saying that in one of his articles, I think it might have been one of the FRF preview ones). All this to say there are no problems with the color pie (I'm all but concise I know, it's a defect of mine). As for rarity, I could see this at regular rare, but also at mythic, so no problem. (2/3) Balance - Limited bomb if you can cast it reliably enough. I could see this in Standard too, maybe as the finisher of a Grixis control deck. I don't think it would show up in older formats, but I wouldn't be that surprised if I were wrong, especially in Modern. In multiplayer, you have the interesting decision of which opponent to attack with this, and the outcome might be very different depending on your choice. This is a feature that multiplayer Spikes will definitely appreciate. The only bad thing I can say here is that it doesn't look that fun from the other side of the table: you're giving up information and most of all your best creature, that might return to you at end of combat (who knows what could happen to it before then?) only after you got hurt by your own creature, which is also not known for being a very fun thing. This might hurt in casual.
Creativity (3/3) Uniqueness - The way this card works is definitely unique. (2/3) Flavor - The name "Evard" is good, but the attribute "Vampire Overlord" feels a bit generic to me, even if it does make sense with the mechanical flavor of temporarily "vampirizing" a creature from an opponent's hand. No flavor text, but there is indeed no room for it on the card, as MSE shows me. One line could fit by shrinking the font size, but if you do the text box looks a bit messy and way worse than it looks without flavor text (I tried), so its absence here is not as big of a problem as it would be otherwise.
Polish (3/3) Quality - I always say that as a judge Gatherer is your best friend, and here we have one more proof of that. I was certain the "attacks an opponent" wording was off and that it just had to be "Whenever CARDNAME attacks, defending player reveals his or her hand…", but I checked Gatherer just to be sure... well, it turns out Kaalia of the Vast begs to disagree, luckily for you! The reminder text is also definitely necessary (last seen on Viashino Sandscout from Tenth Edition). (2/2) Main Challenge - Good. (1/2) Subchallenges - CMC is divisible by 3 but no mention of cycling or cascade.
Total: 21.5/25
First of all, let me say as a final thought that this is a perfect example of a case where it's better to ignore one of the subchallenges and have a strong design than to make a worse design just to meet all the subchallenges. This is something that you should always consider strategically as a player in the MCC: many automatically design a card to meet all challenges while that's not always the best option if it forces you to make your design worse. The only challenge you're forced to meet is the Main Challenge, and you took advantage of that. We still have to wait for the other judge, but I personally think it's quite likely that you will advance. If that's the case we'll see again in the final round, but if it's not, prepare your best Kaladesh-inspired designs for next month! Well, I actually advise you to do that anyway, regardless of whether you advance this round or not!
Razdak, Invoker of MysteriesGUR
Legendary Creature - Human Shaman (Mythic)
When Razdak enters the battlefield, draw a card. GUR: Manifest a card from your hand. 3GUR: Turn target face down permanent you control face up. "Each land whispers a secret, and I am the one who listen."
2/4
Design (2/3) Appeal - Timmy doesn't care that much. Johnny likes this card a lot, there are a lot of tricks he can potentially do with manifest. Spike also likes this card: it replaces itself and can let him take advantage of some synergies with face-down permanents. Still, paying three mana to manifest something and six to turn it face up, for a total of nine mana, is not that appealing to him, even if you can break up the payment over two turns. (3/3) Elegance - Not too long and very easy to understand. Perfect in this regard.
Development (2/3) Viability - All colors have cantrips, even if blue and green are kings of card drawing. Manifest is also in all colors, as turning permanents face up is. This card could be mechanically many different combinations of colors without breaking anything. Temur makes complete sense, but that's more because of the flavor than the mechanics. Flavor is also what could push this to mythic, mechanically I could easily see this at regular rare, as the last ability, which could be the only potentially problematic one, costs a lot of mana. Unfortunately, being legendary doesn't make you automatically mythic, it just increases your chances, we've already seen a remarkable number of legendary creatures at regular rare since the introduction of mythics in Shards of Alara. (3/3) Balance - I see this card as very well balanced. The stats look fine, and I especially appreciate the fact that you're preventing abuse of the last ability by charging for it more or less the same amount of mana you usually pay to unmorph things in Tarkir block. Let's say you have a creature with morph in your hand and you manifest it (with this card or any other means). You're not saving a significant amount of mana by using this card's ability to turn it face up rather than what its own morph cost actually is. The same thing is true if you manifest a creature and pay its mana cost to turn it face up. Actually, you might have to pay more mana if you want to use this card's ability. I think all of this would make the card safe to print. In limited, you would always play this as long as you can reliably cast it even though I don't think it qualifies as a bomb. It could see a little constructed play, but only in Standard, I can't really see this in older formats (that's not necessarily a bad thing). I see no problems in casual or multiplayer.
Creativity (1/3) Uniqueness - As often happens, we've seen all effects by themselves multiple times, they've just never been done together in this particular combination. The flavor of a Temur shaman is also something we've already seen a lot of on Tarkir. (3/3) Flavor - The name is good, even if the first time I instinctively read it as "Rakdos", but that's no big problem. The flavor text is really good, and if you correct the typo at the end of it (see Quality), I could very easily see it printed as is.
Polish (2/3) Quality - A hyphen is missing in "face-down permanent" (-0.5). There is the hyphen when it's an adjective, there is no hyphen when it's a verb. Look at Ixidron to see both on the same card, and notice how there's no hyphen in the first ability (verb) but it is there in the second one (adjective). A third-person "s" is missing at the end of the flavor text ("I am the one who listens", -0.5). Manifest could benefit from having reminder text here but it's ok to leave it out on a mythic. (2/2) Main Challenge - Good. (2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 20/25
For what it counts, I really like this card personally, even though of course I've tried to be as objective as I could in my judgment. We have to wait for the other judge to know whether you're advancing. If you are, see you in the final round, otherwise prepare your best Kaladesh-inspired designs for next month. Oh well, you should probably do that anyway!
Spells your opponents cast from their hands have cascade.
Whenever an opponent casts a spell from his or her hand, counter it.
"They say the dragon fooled me. But I am at the top, and they aren't."
2/3
Design (1.5/3) Appeal - Timmy is the one who wants to cascade, even though he still likes protecting his creatures from removal and enjoys the suspense of cascading anyway, even if it's his opponent who does so. Johnny might be attracted by the inherent strangeness of this card, but I don't actually see a lot to do for him. Spike really likes the protection aspect I talked about for Timmy, and he's also the one who likes messing with his opponent's plans the best, which this card really does. He doesn't like that much the outcome being random though, and himself having no control over it, not even in deckbuilding, as the outcome depends on the opponent's deck and not his own. I think that if there is one kind of player who will definitely be excited by this card, it will be the only kind of player I hate: the griefers (technically a subset of Timmy). (1/3) Elegance - As a full detail-obsessed Melvin, I really like how the two abilities interact with each other: this counters all spells your opponents cast from their hands, but cascade actually casts the spell from exile. While I personally love such details, I have to say this card doesn't look that intuitive at first glance ("Why would I want my opponent to cascade? I want to cascade! But I also want to counter my opponent's spells..."). At least, both abilities are very clear in what they do. There's no real comprehension complexity here, it's just that some players might be perplex by this card and they might think they are missing something while they actually are not.
Development (2/3) Viability - Cascade is in all colors, and abilities similar to the last ones have been seen mostly in blue but also in white, never in black though. Black makes a lot of sense for this card flavorfully (see Flavor), but I see nothing that's mechanically black here. The presence of black could be justified by the "I'm messing with you" feeling this card definitely has, but this card could probably also just be a white/blue card like the original Gwafa Hazid was, or even a monoblue card. Rarity is definitely right, I wouldn't want to see anything like this below mythic, not even at regular rare. (1/3) Balance - The mana cost looks high enough for this card to be safe at its stats. I'm not sure I would play this in my limited deck even if I were in its colors. The first ability really looks like a drawback, and I don't know if the second ability is enough to make up for it at its cost. Also, it might happen that the spell your opponent cascades into is actually better for them/worse for you (those are the same thing, just from different points of view) than the original one that has been countered. In constructed, you can build around it, but ironically the best way of building around this card seems using fateseal effects, which are known for being one of the most unfun things you can do in Magic. This card is also not that fun in general from the other side of the table, even by itself and without fateseal. It can completely disrupt your opponent's plans and the way they wanted to play the game, which can be fun for you but it definitely is not if you put yourself in their shoes. This point is even amplified in multiplayer, where there are multiple opponents for which the game will become unfun until they somehow remove this card, and even that is out of their control as it will depend on what they cascade into, and they have not built their deck with cascade in mind, so they will have to just get lucky. Turning Magic, which is a game where both luck and skill matter, into a game of pure luck doesn't look that good of an idea to me. Obviously, all of this is just my own opinion and I might be wrong. As they say, I'm just human after all. What I do know is that I personally would definitely feel frustated having to play against this card.
Creativity (3/3) Uniqueness - The way this card works is definitely unique. (3/3) Flavor - I remember this guy from Alara, and I just went back to read about him in his wiki page just to refresh my memories. Well, if that description is not one of an Esper-colored character, I don't know what it is. I think the only reason his original card is not black is because he's from Bant, where black mana is missing. On any other plane, or post-Conflux Alara, he would definitely have some black in him, so this card works perfectly from a flavor standpoint. The flavor text is also very good and fitting with his story.
Polish (0.5/3) Quality - Four unnecessary line breaks (4 x -0.5 = -2). P/T should not be bold (-0.5). (2/2) Main Challenge - Good. (2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 16/25
In my opinion, the problem of this card is not the Quality score, even though it doesn't help, but the unfun aspect. I don't know if that will cause your elimination as we have to wait for the other judge's scores, but from my point of view the unfun aspect of this card is a real problem which is still there even if you end up advancing. Should you be eliminated, no need to worry, a new MCC will begin in just a few days, and I hope to see you there anyway. Prepare your best Kaladesh-inspired designs!
In decreasing order for both pairings, wait for the other judges to see who's advancing.
MCC - Winner (6): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019 || Host (15): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here) || Judge (34): every month from Nov 2014 to Nov 2016 except Oct 2015, every month from Feb to Jul 2017 except Apr 2017, then Oct 2017, May Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here) CCL - Winner (3): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last one here) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016 DCC - Winner (1): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar) || Host (3): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016
• The two public custom sets I've been part a part of the design team for: "Brotherhood of Ormos" - Blog post with all info - set thread - design skeleton / card list || "Extinctia: Homo Evanuit" - Blog post with all info - set thread - card list spreadsheet
• "The Lion's Lair", my article series about MTG and custom card design in particular. Latest article here. Here is the article index.Rather outdated by now, and based on the old MCC rubric, but I'm leaving this here for anybody that might be interested anyway.
• My only public attempt at being a writer: the story of my Leonin custom planeswalker Jeff Lionheart. (I have a very big one that I'm working on right now but that's private for now, and I don't know if I will ever actually publish it, and I also have ideas for multiple future ones, including one where I'm going to reprise Jeff.)
Design - (2.5/3) Appeal: Making a legendary 3-color card will always find some appreciation from the commander crowd. Timmy might like putting his big guys out there. Johnny might find ways to use this as well. Spike could like the value of making all cards in hand into 2/2s. (2/3) Elegance: A pretty straightforward concept with the manifesting and turning. Then there's the random 'draw a card' line out of nowhere.
Development - (2/3) Viability: Manifesting cards is in any color. Prying them open hasn't been done in such a long time, one can't say for sure where that belongs. It feels like that is because it's developmentally problematic, but really, Skirk Alarmist never caused anyone trouble, so it can't be that bad.
So while this card doesn't need its three colors, it's still justified by the power of the effect. What I dislike about the card is manifesting from your hand. A big part of the fun that came from manifest was doing it off the top of your library, never knowing what you get. Keeping the opponent guessing. I feel like you really missed out on this. (2/3) Balance: So this grants a rather pricy morph to all of your cards. Not very powerful. But neat doing it at instant speed. I'm not sure how abusable the 6 mana turn up effect is. There's not too many cards that cost a lot more than 6 mana, and you're paying effectivly 9 mana.
The card feels awkward. 6 mana is so much, yet anything less would be too easy to abuse because of the first activated ability. I feel like this wants to be closer to Ixidor, Reality Sculptor and by manifesting from your library you could have went for that.
Creativity - (1.5/3) Uniqueness: Rather reminiscent of Ixidor. Manifesting cards from your hand is a twist though. (2/3) Flavor: The name is a good fit, even though mysteries have been more associated with the Sultai, not so much with the blunt Temur. The flavortext feels off. He's not doing a whole lot with lands and doesn't strike me as the listener. He's quite active in what he does.
Polish - (2.5/3) Quality: listens (-0.5)
Just putting the name of the legendary in short text like that, without having the whole name written out before always looks so wrong to me, but I believe there's precedent?
I'm not going to check through heaps of legendaries though just to find the two exceptions that confirm this, so you get the benefit of the doubt instead.
I'll let it slide this time, but Manifest really requires remindertext. (2/2) Main Challenge: Looks good. (2/2) Subchallenges: Both met.
Total: 18.5/25
Design - (2/3) Appeal: There's certainly a crowd that appreciates chaos. Commander players will like a 3-color legendary. Spike sees the crippling power of this. Spike also gets really upset at the randomness in his games. Not as much as Johnny though. Pretty much destroyed all his hopes and dreams with this one. (1/3) Elegance: Giving your opponents spells cascade and then counter them is just trying to be clever. That's a very cryptic way to spell "Whenever an opponent casts a spell from his or her hand, counter that spell, then that player exiles cards from the top of his or her library until he or she exiles a nonland card that costs less. That player may cast that card without paying its mana cost. Then he or she puts all cards exiled this way on the bottom of his or her library in a random order."
It may be 'elegant' as in short, but elegance is about making a card understandable. You are far from that.
Development - (1.5/3) Viability: Chaos is red. Possibility Storm is red. With your color combination you couldn't be further off. I guess blue makes sense for tricky-ness. (1.5/3) Balance: Oh boy, this doesn't seem right. 6 mana may be excessive and 2/3 easy to remove, but have you every played with a Possibility Storm on the board? Nothing works out anymore.
And yours even reduces the cost of the card, rendering any 1 mana spell virtually useless. Most decks play on a curve and won't run too many overly situational cards, so this might not utterly destroy them.
It still makes it very hard to get rid of it. You have to consider that it already counters any card your opponents may have kept in their hand to deal with anything. Any plan ruined. This is devastating.
Creativity - (1.5/3) Uniqueness: One sided Possibility Storm. In all fairness, it's a twist on Cascade that hasn't been done. (3/3) Flavor: So he made it, huh. I like the flavor of counteracting your opponents every move, twisting it into something else.
It's so spot on, that I'm going to ignore the sloppiness of the flavortext. It has the right idea, but the execution is a bit lacking in eloquence.
Polish - (3/3) Quality: Looks good. (2/2) Main Challenge: Very wedgy. (2/2) Subchallenges: Both met.
Total: 17.5/25
Design - (2/3) Appeal: Sure, Spike will enjoy this. (2.5/3) Elegance: You'll have to make the connection what it means to cycle this. Something like "You may cast ~ as though it had flash if you pay 3 more to cast it. If you do, draw a card when you cast it." would have been more clear, but obviously would miss out on cycling synergies.
Development - (3/3) Viability: "Flash" fits well into these colors. The colors combined justify the powerful card. (3/3) Balance: Comparable to Mantis Rider. Instead of vigilance and haste you get an additional toughness and a mana sink option.
Creativity - (1/3) Uniqueness: Sure, it's a cool thing to make of cycling, but the effect really doesn't make for something overly new. It's just pay for flash. (1.5/3) Flavor: Huh, so THAT's a Amesha. Really had room for flavortext there.
Design - (3/3) Appeal: Timmy might enjoy a way to get his goods on the board. Johnny likes the deck building incentive. Spike likes the value. Neat. (1.5/3) Elegance: There's way too much going on. The upkeep trigger lets you choose which creature you want to buff. Putting it on the creature you just manifested would be much more straight forward and wouldn't make much of a difference.
The sac effect fits well into the theme, but then goes on with this weird loot effect that seems a bit random. I'd like a design like this to be more streamlined.
Development - (3/3) Viability: Manifest is in any color. Spreading counters like that is green, the loot blue and haste red. So I'd say the colors are spot on, even though you tried a bit too hard with the blue part. Rare is a good fit, Mythic would have been a stretch. (3/3) Balance: 6 mana is costly for a 3/3 haste each turn. The potential when getting a creature is nice. I'd still say this sits at a good spot. It's not overly competetive, but it'd find a home in some more casual or limited decks.
Creativity - (1.5/3) Uniqueness: This is very close to Whisperwood Elemental. A repeated Manifest trigger and the option to sac to give your dudes a boost. The upkeep trigger with the haste does make for a nice twist though. (2/3) Flavor: Neat name, missing the flavor text.
Polish - (2/3) Quality: The first ability requires a target when the ability goes on the stack, well before any card gets manifested. I don't think that's intended. (2/2) Main Challenge: Wedge alright, don't forget to indicate your picked option next time. (2/2) Subchallenges: Both met.
Total: 20/25
netn10 18.5 vs. Vertain 17.5
RaikouRider 20 vs. sperlman 20
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
Ethereal Crescendo3GUR
Enchantment (R)
At the beginning of your upkeep, manifest the top card of your library, then put a +1/+1 counter on target face-down creature. That creature gains haste until end of turn.
Sacrifice Ethereal Crescendo: Put a +1/+1 counter on each face-down creature you control. Whenever one or more face-down creatures you control deal combat damage to a player this turn, you may draw two cards. If you do, discard two cards.
Design – (2.5/6) (1.5/3) Appeal: Timmy likes manifest, and also likes the idea of a 2/2 creature and a counter each turn. It’s a bit too costly for Spike to care much about it. Johnny might be able to find something to do with all those +1/+1 counters and “free” creatures, but I’m not so sure. (1/3) Elegance: It certainly is a wordy card, but it’s not too difficult to grasp. New players may have a bit of a hard time understanding that, no matter how many face down creatures he connects with, he still only gets to loot two cards. Also, because the target for the +1/+1 counter needs to be chosen when the ability is put onto the stack, this won’t actually be able to put the +1/+1 counter on the face-down creature that was just put onto the battlefield. I feel like a lot of players may find that confusing and unintuitive. Because of this, I think the +1/+1 counter from the first ability should go onto the card that was just manifested instead of “target facedown creature”, especially because it also gives the creature haste. Since this is occurring during your upkeep, there aren’t a lot of scenarios in which giving another face-down creature haste would come into play. In all, this card seems a bit like a bunch of abilities mashed together that don’t necessarily seem to jive in any way other than they all effect facedown creatures.
Development – (5/6) (3/3) Viability: Any color can have manifest, green puts out +1/+1 counters, blue cycles, and red gives haste, so everything seems in color. Rare seems right also. I don’t see any rules problems. (2/3) Balance: I don’t think this card is broken in any way. As a matter of fact, it seems a bit weak to me. I think the “free” creature each turn is much more powerful than the activated ability. I think maybe that might only be activated in response to it being targeted with removal. It would see play in limited if you could afford to run all three of these colors. Although I’m not sure it is powerful enough to commit to three colors early in draft, nor is it powerful enough to add a third color if you opened it late, but if you were already in these colors when you opened it, it is an auto-include. I don’t see it being played much in any other formats (except maybe a bit in EDH), so I see no problems there. Maybe it could see a bit of Standard play if a manifest/morph deck hit the big time.
Creativity – (3/6) (1.5/3) Uniqueness: Nothing here seems particularly inventive, but all of these abilities have never been on a card together, so there’s that. (1.5/3) Flavor: No room for flavor text. The name is good.
Polish – (7/7) (3/3) Quality: Looks good, although I question whether you intended for the +1/+1 counter to be able to go on the just manifested creature, but technically everything works here. (2/2) Main Challenge: Good (2/2) Subchallenges: You bethca.
Amesha of BrillianceGWU
Creature - Angel {R}
Flying
Cycling 3GWU (3GWU, Discard this card: Draw a card.)
When you cycle Amesha of Brilliance, return it from your graveyard to the battlefield. 3/4
Design – (5/6) (2.5/3) Appeal: Timmy appreciates the beating he will lay on his opponents with this. Spike does too, although he’s not sure it’s worth the three color investment. Not much here for Johnny. (2.5/3) Elegance: Pretty straight forward, although I feel like stacking the cycling triggers may cause some confusion.
Development – (5/6) (2.5/3) Viability: Cycling can be seen in all colors, so no problem there. I’m not sure the “reanimation” ability really makes sense in Bant though. The blue kinda makes sense since this is basically just a glorified Gryff Vanguard, but because the card comes back from your graveyard, maybe monowhite, monoblack, B/W or even Esper or Grixsis might make more sense. All of these combinations would still make sense with round-a-bout flash ability this card has. Still, I don’t think it’s totally beyond the realm of possibility that this card could be printed in Bant colors. Rare seems good for a 3/4 flyer at three CMC with potential upside. It has no rules problems that I can see. (2.5/3) Balance: A 3/4 flyer for three CMC is a solid beater, but for one more CMC you could have Restoration Angel. For the same CMC you could have Mantis Rider. I don’t really see the cycling/flash ability as too great of an upside at that cost, although it would certainly come into play in the late game. Still, I would say that this is a solid card that would certainly see play in an Alara based limited, which would most assuredly have the mana base to support it. It could perhaps see some Standard play, but it is too weak to see much play anywhere else.
Creativity – (2/6) (1/3) Uniqueness: There’s nothing really ground breaking here, but all of these affects have never been together on a card before. (1/3) Flavor: Not a lot of room for flavor text, but I think a one liner could have fit. The name seems Banty.
All or Nothing6RWB
Enchantment (M)
When All or Nothing enters the battlefield, manifest all cards of your library.
Creatures you control have haste. Ordinary day for Mardu. Darkest hour for their foes.
Design – (5.5/6) (2.5/3) Appeal: Timmy likes the massive effect. Johnny loves all of the possibilities this card could create. Flipping a Laboratory Maniac during his upkeep for instance. Spike thinks it’s too expensive. (3/3) Elegance: Pretty simple and straight forward. The abilities clearly make sense together.
Development – (5/6) (3/3) Viability: Manifest was seen in all colors, the rest of the card seems red, which is probably fine on a Mardu card. Mythic is correct. It’s a crazy card, but I see no rules problems. (2/3) Balance: So the bottom line here is, you play this card and you win the game on the spot, if not, you lose right there (or when you draw a card). At nine mana, that might be ok, but I’m not really a fan of card that just wins right then and there, all on its own. It would really upset me in EDH when my opponent has an empty board, but then plays this and just wins right there. I don’t think it would really cause any problems in Standard, or even any of the non-rotating competitive formats, but I do kinda worry a bit about it EDH and casual multi-player.
Creativity – (6/6) (3/3) Uniqueness: There certainly isn’t anything quite like this card. Ghastly Conscription can manifest a lot of cards at once, but it doesn’t lead to the win now or lose now situation that this card does. (3/3) Flavor: I really like the flavor here. The name mechanics and flavor text all go together very well. Good job.
Polish – (6.5/7) (2.5/3) Quality: You have an additional space after the comma (-0.5) I’m just not sure about “manifest all cards of your library”. I don’t know exactly how it should be worded (so I’m not subtracting any points), but the way you have it seems weird. “Manifest each card of your library” might sound better, but I don’t think “manifest each card from your library” works, even though it sounds better to me from an English stand point. Regardless, I can’t really say it’s wrong. (2/2) Main Challenge: Good. (2/2) Subchallenges: Yep.
Varakna ScavengerBRG
Creature - Viashino Shaman (R)
Cycling 2 (2, Discard this card: Draw a card.)
Whenever you sacrifice a creature, you may pay 1. If you do, return Varakna Scavenger from your graveyard to your hand.
3/2
Design – (4.5/6) (2/3) Appeal: Johnny could definitely build something around this. Spike would only play this if Johnny somehow broke it. Timmy doesn’t really see the point. (2.5/3) Elegance: I could see some players being confused about whether or not this could return itself to your hand if it was sacrificed. Perhaps it should be worded “whenever you sacrifice another creature….” like Nether Traitor is? Other than that everything is good here.
Development – (6/6) (3/3) Viability: At first glance, this almost looks like it could be an UC, but I think rare is right. Jund is the number one creature sac shard, so all good there. I don’t really see any problems here. (3/3) Balance: This card seems pretty weak at first, but it is a deceptively powerful mana sink if you have a good sac engine. Of course you probably won’t in limited, so this probably wouldn’t be a very high pick there, although if you were in something like devour (a Jund ability), you would take it. The ability to repeatedly draw a card for would get this card a look in an EDH deck like Prossh, Skyraider of Kher. I could see this getting played as a one or two of in some casual decks too. Maybe even Standard even if there was a viable sac deck in the format. I don’t think the card is strong enough to see play in any of the non-rotating formats.
Creativity – (2.5/6) (2/3) Uniqueness: There is nothing too shocking here, but the combination of abilities seems pretty fresh. (1.5/3) Flavor: Name seems fine. There’s no room for flavor text. Still, it manages to feel very Jundy.
Polish – (7/7) (3/3) Quality: Everything seems fine here. (2/2) Main Challenge: On point. (2/2) Subchallenges: Good.
(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)
All or Nothing6RWB
Enchantment (M)
When All or Nothing enters the battlefield, manifest all cards of your library.
Creatures you control have haste. Ordinary day for Mardu. Darkest hour for their foes.
Design - (2.5/3) Appeal: This is a Tammy card through and through. I am sure that there would be nothing else quite like just shoving her entire library onto the battlefield after this resolves.
Jenny is appealed by the existence of this card. The only problem for her would be that she would lose access to her library as a library after this card resolves, which she kind of needs in order to keep playing after casting this.
As a Spike myself, I personally am not sure as to whether or not I should dislike, loathe, or hate the very idea of this card, to be perfectly honest. (2/3) Elegance: I am not sure if elegant is the right word for a card that allows you to empty your whole library onto the battlefield in one go. I just cannot imagine it being elegant. A card like this would just be a big mess if it ever actually resolved in an actual game. The battlefield would be chaos. Then, you would have to actually tap each and every newly manifested card in order to attack with all of them. This card would be so slow to resolve if one wanted to be careful not to damage any sleeves.
On the bright side, this card literally has three lines of rules text.
Development - (3/3) Viability: This card is definitely in Mardu colors, and it definitely is worthy of being at mythic rare and nothing less. (2/3) Balance: Aside from likely being absolutely unplayable in limited, this card looks as though it would probably be fine and not break anything in particular in any other format that I can think of.
However, I am not sure if I can say the same for casual or multiplayer formats. Sure, this card could be a lot of fun to cast the first time, maybe the second time as well, but exactly how many times are any opponents going to want to put up with this card? (To be perfectly honest, I would personally prefer ‘zero’, myself.)
Creativity - (3/3) Uniqueness: If I could somehow award more than three points for this particular criterion here, I probably would. (3/3) Flavor: CHAAAAARGE!!!!!
Polish - (2/3) Quality: There is an unnecessary space in between the words “battlefield” and “manifest” in the first line of rules text (yes our judging panel noticed that, minus half a point).
This card is also missing the manifest reminder text (there is room for it on the card, minus half a point). (To manifest a card, put it onto the battlefield face down as a 2/2 creature. Turn it face up any time for its mana cost if it’s a creature card.)
Notably, there are two ways to word the second clause of the first line of rules text. Either “manifest all cards of your library”, which is fine, or ‘manifest all the cards of your library. The first is slightly better wording, while the second is slightly better English. Just a minor, though noteworthy, quibble that I thought was worth mentioning. (2/2) Main Challenge: Main challenge met! (2/2) Subchallenges: Both subchallenges met!
Total: 21.5/25
Final thoughts: I personally thought that Worldfire was crazy, but this card is just something else entirely. Oh, dear, has this submission ever so stressed out my usual sensibilities! Forgive me, but I think I would just have to walk away from the table if this card was ever played against me in a game. Even if only for a few minutes, just enough time for a hot cup of soothing chamomile tea. Regardless of my subjectivity, this card was objectively well done.
Varakna ScavengerBRG
Creature - Viashino Shaman (R)
Cycling 2 (2, Discard this card: Draw a card.)
Whenever you sacrifice a creature, you may pay 1. If you do, return Varakna Scavenger from your graveyard to your hand.
3/2
Design - (2/3) Appeal: Unfortunately, Tammy is bored by this card.
Jenny sees the potential for an engine with this card involving cycling and sacrificing and would consequently be interested.
Spike herself would also be appealed by a playable three mana, three power creature with multiple upsides such as these. (2.5/3) Elegance: The wording faux-pas that prevents a full elegance score here is that ‘Whenever you sacrifice a creature’ should actually be “Whenever you sacrifice another creature” for the purposes of this card’s presumed intent.
Otherwise, this card is deserving of a near-perfect score for this criterion, indeed.
Development - (3/3) Viability: This card is definitely Jund in colors and otherwise not blue nor white.
Rare is also a definitely suitable rarity for this card. (3/3) Balance: This card passes for playable in Limited, provided that you can draft the necessary colors. Constructed formats are where this card really shines, but it does nothing too over the top there that would merit concern.
This card is also fine in casual and multiplayer.
Creativity - (2/3) Uniqueness: Cycling has been done a lot throughout the history of Magic, but at least the second line of rules text is still relatively unique regardless. (1.5/3) Flavor: There is no flavor text on this card, and there was indeed a room for at least one line of flavor text, believe it or not. This card’s flavor is suitable and otherwise fine. (Even if I myself would personally prefer ‘Lizard Shaman’ over “Viashino Shaman”.)
Polish - (2.5/3) Quality: My fellow judge, Flatline, has actually missed a sneaky qualitative error in this card’s rules text. The first line of rules text should be the second and last line of rules text in order to remain consistent with all other cycling creatures (minus half a point).
The only exception that immediately comes to my mind for to this qualitative rule is possibly for creatures that have abilities when they are cycled, which is not the case for this particular card. (2/2) Main Challenge: Main challenge met! (2/2) Subchallenges: Both subchallenges met!
Total: 20.5/25
Final thought: Yes, one of my personal pet peeves in Magic is that cards that should be typed as ‘Lizard’ are typed as “Viashino” for some reason that is just beyond my understanding.
Inviolable Gargantuan3RRGGWW
Creature -- Beast (M)
Cascade
Trample, vigilance
As long as Inviolable Gargantuan is on the stack or on the battlefield, spells, abilities and permanents you control can't be targeted by spells or abilities your opponents control.
8/8
Design - (1.5/3) Appeal: It really does not get much bigger than nine mana and 8/8 with upsides galore for Timmy.
While this is definitely a card to top off a RGW deck with, there is nothing for Johnny to actually do with this card after he actually casts it.
This is far too expensive for Spike to ever reasonably play; even the ultimatums were a bit of a stretch for her, and those were only seven mana. (1.5/3) Elegance: This card is pretty straightforward (well, as straightforward as cascade can be at times) aside from the third line of rules text. I disagree with bravelion83 that mentioning ‘the stack’ alone is worth a below-average elegance score, but I agree that it certainly is not worth an above-average score for this criterion.
Development - (2.5/3) Viability: This card definitely works in Naya colors, and definitely deserves to be mythic rare.
My fellow judge, bravelion83, actually forgot about a relatively recent particular mythic rare card from Magic Origins that mentioned the stack in its reminder text: Day’s Undoing. Hence, I would say that mentioning the stack on a mythic rare is only a rules bend and not a rules break. However, since the aforementioned card is rotating out of Standard very soon with the release of Kaladesh, I doubt that we will see any other cards again that mention the stack explicitly for the time-being, at least.
It is also worth mentioning that the mechanic known as split second is a 7 on the Storm Scale partly just because it mentions the stack. Thus, I would say that mentioning the stack should only be reserved for especially special cases (like Day’s Undoing); I am not entirely sure that this card is one of those special cases. (1.5/3) Balance: Best of luck in attempting to hard-cast this in Limited for a rather restricted nine total mana.
Honestly, this card is probably not worth nine total mana, believe it or not. If this were eight mana, say 5RGW or something (regardless of the first subchallenge), I as a Spike myself would be at least a little more interested in possibly playing this card, especially since it is still vulnerable to board clears like End Hostilities and Crux of Fate despite the ‘catch-all’ feeling of the third line of rules text.
In my personal experience, hexproof (and, by extension, ‘can’t be countered’) does not contribute to a fun experience around a casual table. I see no problems with this in multiplayer other than the obvious target that you are pasting onto your back by playing this, but there are plenty of other cards that do that as well in multiplayer.
Creativity - (2/3) Uniqueness: The third line is a pretty weird way to rewrite and perhaps consolidate other, simpler lines of rules text.
Hence, it earns an above-average score for this particular criterion of uniqueness. (1.5/3) Flavor: There is room for one line of flavor text on this card without the reminder text of cascade. Otherwise, this card earns an average flavor score as-is. Nothing particularly special shone here for me as a Vorthos, yet this card does not have any flavor issues otherwise.
Polish - (1.5/3) Quality: The first line of rules text, “Cascade”, should actually be the last line of rules text since this card is a permanent (minus half a point). There is no room for cascade reminder text on this particular card, although it would otherwise be required.
The second line of rules text should read ‘Vigilance, trample’ in order to conserve the proper ordering of evergreen keywords (see Tajuru Pathwarden and Oakgnarl Warrior, minus half a point).
The third line of rules text should not use “can’t be targeted by”; this phrase should be replaced with ‘can’t be the target of’ (minus half a point). (2/2) Main Challenge: Main challenge met! (2/2) Subchallenges: Both subchallenges met!
Total: 16/25
Final thought: I wonder what, in the same vein, an “Inviolable Colossal” would be like at a mana cost of 9RGW.
Evard, Vampire Overlord3UBR
Legendary Creature - Vampire Warrior (Mythic Rare)
Flying, haste
Whenever Evard, Vampire Overlord attacks an opponent, that player reveals his or her hand. You may put a creature card from it onto the battlefield tapped and attacking that opponent. Return that creature to its owner's hand at end of combat. (Return it only if it's on the battlefield.)
5/5
Design - (3/3) Appeal: This card is excitingly grand enough for Timmy, intriguingly interesting enough for Johnny, and advantageously playable for Spike. What’s not to love? (2.5/3) Elegance: The second line of rules text is doomed to prevent a perfect score here, but your cleverness (including the unusual reminder text) really helps bring the score for this criterion to near-perfection.
Development - (3/3) Viability: Grixis colors make absolutely perfect sense here.
Mythic rare seems just right for such a unique card. If there was previous precedent for a card such as this, maybe it could exist at rare, but there is none as of yet. (2/3) Balance: Haste feels as though it may be just a little too much on this card, balance-wise. The inclusion of that keyword really pushes this card’s power level to the point where I would be surprised if it did not see Standard play; I would be floored if this card were not regularly first-picked in Limited. It could perhaps work in Modern as well...
Now, who do you attack with this in multiplayer? Commander is probably where this card really shines in order to serve as its rightful home.
I am having trouble thinking of a less fun card to go up against around a casual table, however. Emrakul, the Promised End? Basically, without a timely instant speed counter or removal, one would have to reveal their hand and leave the fate of perhaps their best creature up to the whims of the opponent. So, not exactly the best way to build bridges between two players.
Creativity - (3/3) Uniqueness: Nothing less than a perfect score will do here for this particular criterion. (1.5/3) Flavor: No flavor text, yet there was realistically no room for such realistically on this card if it were to ever see print. The name is a little generic (quick, Google “Evard’s Black Tentacles”), but the rules text as least feels somewhat flavorful at least.
Polish - (3/3) Quality: Perfect! (Especial thanks are in order from me for the unusual reminder text.) (2/2) Main Challenge: Main challenge met! (Option A) (1/2) Subchallenges: Subchallenge 1 met!
Total: 21/25
Final thought: Seriously, where are this legend’s tentacles?
(A big thank you to bravelion83 for this banner, an elaboration on the art of these cards: Maelstrom Nexus by Steven Belledin and Maelstrom Wanderer by Thomas M. Baxa.)
September MCC Round 3
“Spacey Shards & Timey-Wimey Wedges”
Once again, welcome back to the September MCC! As of now, Ravnica is light-years behind us. Now, just ahead of us is...oh dear!
We appear to be at a fork in space-time! Fear not, I, Bly, your lovely tour guide, will expertly navigate us through this outrageous rift! Just as soon as you all help me figure out exactly how...
To our left is the scenic plane of Alara. Exalted knights, wondrous artifacts, unspeakable oddities, cultured cuisine, picturesque landscapes, all that and more await us there!
To our right is the pulchritudinous plane of Tarkir. Dragons, khans, clans, broods, and plenty more await us there as well!
This round, it is up to each of you to once again choose your colors once more while we are here! Forward!
Choose one of the following options. Please note your chosen option along with your entry!
Sub Challenge 1: The card has a converted mana cost that is divisible by three.
Sub Challenge 2: The card has 'cycling' or 'cascade' in its rules text.
Sub Challenge 1: The card has a converted mana cost that is divisible by three.
Sub Challenge 2: The card has 'morph' or 'manifest' in its rules text.
GWU (Bant)
WUB (Esper)
UBR (Grixis)
BRG (Jund)
RGW (Naya)
Basic landscycling is fine for the purposes of the second subchallenge.
WBG (Abzan)
URW (Jeskai)
BGU (Sultai)
RWB (Mardu)
GUR (Temur)
“Megamorph” is fine for the purposes of the second subchallenge. I recommend against using it and would prefer simply spelling out the +1/+1 counter(s) as an ‘is turned face up’ triggered ability (similarly to Hooded Hydra) out of viability concerns.
If you have any requests for further clarification, please do not hesitate to inquire, but preferably do so in the actual MCC Discussion Thread.
In addition, please take note of the following points.
Specifically for this month:
On rarity and formatting (courtesy of bravelion83):
You can read bravelion83’s latest article in regards to his latest opinion on this topic. I would also recommend reading the first series of his Lion’s Lair articles as well! They are all quite good.
On reminder text:
On the use of “create” versus “put onto the battlefield tokens”. This is the official ruling for this month, courtesy of bravelion83.
(X/3) Appeal: Do the different player psychographics (Timmy/Johnny/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
DEADLINES*
In green, the next deadline to come.
In blue, further future deadlines to come.
In red, past deadlines.
Player deadline: Saturday, September 24th 23:59 EDT
Judge deadline: Tuesday, September 27th 23:59 EDT
*Time extensions are infrequent but possible until the deadline is past.
JUDGES
Blydden
bravelion83
doomfish
Flatline
PLAYERS
Groovelord
Marco
netn10
RaikouRider
Raptorchan
sperlman
Vertain
Voxzorz
BRACKETS: The top two in each versus bracket advance to Round 4.
Blydden
Raptorchan vs. Voxzorz
Groovelord vs. Marco
bravelion83
Groovelord vs. Marco
netn10 vs. Vertain
doomfish
netn10 vs. Vertain
RaikouRider vs. sperlman
Flatline
RaikouRider vs. sperlman
Raptorchan vs. Voxzorz
Razdak, Invoker of Mysteries GUR
Legendary Creature - Human Shaman (Mythic)
When Razdak enters the battlefield, draw a card.
GUR: Manifest a card from your hand.
3GUR: Turn target face down permanent you control face up.
"Each land whispers a secret, and I am the one who listen."
2/4
Gwafa Hazid, Chairman 3WUB
Legendary Creature - Human Rogue (M)
Spells your opponents cast from their hands have cascade.
Whenever an opponent casts a spell from his or her hand, counter it.
"They say the dragon fooled me. But I am at the top, and they aren't."
2/3
Inviolable Gargantuan 3RRGGWW
Creature -- Beast (M)
Cascade
Trample, vigilance
As long as Inviolable Gargantuan is on the stack or on the battlefield, spells, abilities and permanents you control can't be targeted by spells or abilities your opponents control.
8/8
Enchantment (R)
At the beginning of your upkeep, manifest the top card of your library, then put a +1/+1 counter on target face-down creature. That creature gains haste until end of turn.
Sacrifice Ethereal Crescendo: Put a +1/+1 counter on each face-down creature you control. Whenever one or more face-down creatures you control deal combat damage to a player this turn, you may draw two cards. If you do, discard two cards.
All or Nothing 6RWB
Enchantment (M)
When All or Nothing enters the battlefield, manifest all cards of your library.
Creatures you control have haste.
Ordinary day for Mardu. Darkest hour for their foes.
Creature - Angel {R}
Flying
Cycling 3GWU (3GWU, Discard this card: Draw a card.)
When you cycle Amesha of Brilliance, return it from your graveyard to the battlefield.
3/4
Emille, Seven-Sting Dancer Shalin Nariya
Varakna Scavenger BRG
Creature - Viashino Shaman (R)
Cycling 2 (2, Discard this card: Draw a card.)
Whenever you sacrifice a creature, you may pay 1. If you do, return Varakna Scavenger from your graveyard to your hand.
3/2
No room for flavour text... qnq
Image credit to: https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/df/f9/8b/dff98be99d7d41c8ab0af66c15c73c43.jpg
Legendary Creature - Vampire Warrior (Mythic Rare)
Flying, haste
Whenever Evard, Vampire Overlord attacks an opponent, that player reveals his or her hand. You may put a creature card from it onto the battlefield tapped and attacking that opponent. Return that creature to its owner's hand at end of combat. (Return it only if it's on the battlefield.)
5/5
Blydden
Raptorchan vs. Voxzorz
Groovelord vs. Marco
bravelion83
Groovelord vs. Marco
netn10 vs. Vertain
doomfish
netn10 vs. Vertain
RaikouRider vs. sperlman
Flatline
RaikouRider vs. sperlman
Raptorchan vs. Voxzorz
Design
(2/3) Appeal - Talk about a card for Timmy! He loooooves this card! Costs too much for Spike to care. I don't see much for Johnny to do.
(1/3) Elegance - The text is easy to understand, but there is one big problem here: the stack. We know mentioning the stack is one of the most confusing things you can do as a designer for many players. A lot of players, especially casual or newer ones, don't even know it exists, let alone how it works. Even though it's certainly a thing they will have to learn if they want to progress in the game, we still have to make sure the cards are understandable to everyone, including those players. It really pains me, but we enfranchised players have to remember we actually are a little minority of all the Magic players in the world, and the numbers Maro told us recently really hit me. I knew we were a minority, but I thought we were more than not even 1% of all Magic players...
Development
(2/3) Viability - No problems with the color pie: cascade is in all five colors, trample in red and green, vigilance in green and white, uncounterability (the first half of the last ability) in red and green, and hexproof (the other half) in green. Rarity is definitely right: this is a perfect example of what a mythic should look like. There is an unwritten design rule this breaks though: "don't ever mention the stack" (see Elegance).
(1.5/3) Balance - For such a high and restrictive cost, I can't see this being problematic anywhere. If you're able to cast this in limited (and that's a huge "if"), saying that it's a bomb is reductive. In competitive constructed you should have already won before you hit nine mana. In casual constructed, I could see this card being a huge success if it didn't mention the stack. Still, if there is a way to gently lead newer or less experienced players to learn more about the stack, it can be that of mentioning it on a card they will actively want to play. In multiplayer, this gets a huge target upon your head, which is not good from your point of view usually. It also suffices a single Day of Judgment or any untargeted removal to get rid of it, which is good for balancing this card, but the more opponents you have, the more likely it will be that they have it. Finally, there is an interesting thing about cascade: it will be hard to abuse it on this card, as to do that you would have to only have (up to four copies of) a single spell that costs less than nine mana in your deck. Just try to play a deck that is only lands, a single spell under nine mana, and all the rest costing 9+ mana... it doesn't sound that good of an idea. Cascade automatically gets more balanced the higher the CMC is, because you automatically have less control over what you get, and that kind of self-balancing is the interesting thing I wanted to mention.
Creativity
(2/3) Uniqueness - The way this card works is original even though it's clearly very close to hexproof, which is evergreen. The mention of the stack is also something we don't see very often, by now I think the last time we saw it was in Time Spiral with split second, but that's for a reason (see Elegance).
(1.5/3) Flavor - The name is fine and the concept of inviolability works very well with this card's mechanics. The word "Gargantuan" makes perfect sense too because what else would you call an 8/8 trampling vigilant Beast monster like this? If you don't include reminder text for cascade, up to two lines of flavor text could fit according to MSE. If you do, than this card's text is already at almost-microtext level, so no way it would fit. As this is a mythic, and so it does not absolutely have to include reminder text, I would have liked a short flavor text to be there.
Polish
(1.5/3) Quality - Pay attention to the position of the cascade keyword on a card. If you look at all existing cards with cascade, you see that on instants and sorceries it comes first, but on permanents it always comes last (-0.5). Link to the relevant Gatherer search on the following line. You have to copy and paste it as links tags won't work because of the square brackets:
http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?text= [cascade]
Also, not being an evergreen keyword, it would need reminder text under ordinary conditions, but here we have a mythic with an already crowded text box so it's one of those few cases where it's actually acceptable to leave it out.
Vigilance comes before trample, most recent examples: Tajuru Pathwarden from OGW and Werewolf of Ancient Hunger from SOI (-0.5). Finally, "can't be targeted by" should be "can't be the target of" (recent examples are Canopy Cover and Gaea's Revenge, -0.5). There would also be the double minus sign instead of a long dash in the type line, but there is nothing here that makes me aware you are not under the non-Latin characters restriction, so I have to give you the benefit of the doubt on that.
(2/2) Main Challenge - Good.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 15.5/25
The mention of the stack has costed you a lot of points on my part. We still technically have to wait the other judge's results to see who's advancing, but I can tell you this card would have scored a lot better from me if its text box were:
This is an almost-functionally-identical card that does not mention the stack. There can be corner cases (as always in Magic), but the reason why you might want to make your spells on the stack untargetable is only to avoid them being countered. I don't know for sure if this will cause your elimination, even though I honestly think it's very likely. If it does, I hope you had fun anyway and I hope to see you again next month. Prepare your best Kaladesh-inspired designs!
Design
(3/3) Appeal - Timmy likes this, both for its stats and because of the visceral feeling of stealing a creature from his opponent's hand. Let's always remember that he doesn't just like huge creatures and spells. Well, he certainly does, but what he actually wants is to experience something. Johnny wants to express his cleverness instead, and he can do so here with some creative use of the stolen creature. After all, it only returns if it's on the battlefield, and who knows what might happen to it before it returns? For example, a Johnny/Spike hybrid would answer, it could get sacrificed! Play this with a Nantuko Husk or something like that and you get a strange mix of hand disruption and removal that both Johnny and Spike appreciate. (Now don't tell me I don't go in depth about the psychographics... )
(2.5/3) Elegance - A bit wordy but very easy to understand. It might have non-obvious strategic implications, but the reminder text helps a lot there.
Development
(3/3) Viability - Flying is blue and secondary black, haste is red and secondary black, and the triggered ability is a mix between hand disruption, which is black, and a reverse Viashino Sandscout, which is red but could also make sense in black as it's known that card has been the inspiration for dash, the Kolaghan mechanic in FRF and DTK (I remember Maro saying that in one of his articles, I think it might have been one of the FRF preview ones). All this to say there are no problems with the color pie (I'm all but concise I know, it's a defect of mine). As for rarity, I could see this at regular rare, but also at mythic, so no problem.
(2/3) Balance - Limited bomb if you can cast it reliably enough. I could see this in Standard too, maybe as the finisher of a Grixis control deck. I don't think it would show up in older formats, but I wouldn't be that surprised if I were wrong, especially in Modern. In multiplayer, you have the interesting decision of which opponent to attack with this, and the outcome might be very different depending on your choice. This is a feature that multiplayer Spikes will definitely appreciate. The only bad thing I can say here is that it doesn't look that fun from the other side of the table: you're giving up information and most of all your best creature, that might return to you at end of combat (who knows what could happen to it before then?) only after you got hurt by your own creature, which is also not known for being a very fun thing. This might hurt in casual.
Creativity
(3/3) Uniqueness - The way this card works is definitely unique.
(2/3) Flavor - The name "Evard" is good, but the attribute "Vampire Overlord" feels a bit generic to me, even if it does make sense with the mechanical flavor of temporarily "vampirizing" a creature from an opponent's hand. No flavor text, but there is indeed no room for it on the card, as MSE shows me. One line could fit by shrinking the font size, but if you do the text box looks a bit messy and way worse than it looks without flavor text (I tried), so its absence here is not as big of a problem as it would be otherwise.
Polish
(3/3) Quality - I always say that as a judge Gatherer is your best friend, and here we have one more proof of that. I was certain the "attacks an opponent" wording was off and that it just had to be "Whenever CARDNAME attacks, defending player reveals his or her hand…", but I checked Gatherer just to be sure... well, it turns out Kaalia of the Vast begs to disagree, luckily for you! The reminder text is also definitely necessary (last seen on Viashino Sandscout from Tenth Edition).
(2/2) Main Challenge - Good.
(1/2) Subchallenges - CMC is divisible by 3 but no mention of cycling or cascade.
Total: 21.5/25
First of all, let me say as a final thought that this is a perfect example of a case where it's better to ignore one of the subchallenges and have a strong design than to make a worse design just to meet all the subchallenges. This is something that you should always consider strategically as a player in the MCC: many automatically design a card to meet all challenges while that's not always the best option if it forces you to make your design worse. The only challenge you're forced to meet is the Main Challenge, and you took advantage of that. We still have to wait for the other judge, but I personally think it's quite likely that you will advance. If that's the case we'll see again in the final round, but if it's not, prepare your best Kaladesh-inspired designs for next month! Well, I actually advise you to do that anyway, regardless of whether you advance this round or not!
Design
(2/3) Appeal - Timmy doesn't care that much. Johnny likes this card a lot, there are a lot of tricks he can potentially do with manifest. Spike also likes this card: it replaces itself and can let him take advantage of some synergies with face-down permanents. Still, paying three mana to manifest something and six to turn it face up, for a total of nine mana, is not that appealing to him, even if you can break up the payment over two turns.
(3/3) Elegance - Not too long and very easy to understand. Perfect in this regard.
Development
(2/3) Viability - All colors have cantrips, even if blue and green are kings of card drawing. Manifest is also in all colors, as turning permanents face up is. This card could be mechanically many different combinations of colors without breaking anything. Temur makes complete sense, but that's more because of the flavor than the mechanics. Flavor is also what could push this to mythic, mechanically I could easily see this at regular rare, as the last ability, which could be the only potentially problematic one, costs a lot of mana. Unfortunately, being legendary doesn't make you automatically mythic, it just increases your chances, we've already seen a remarkable number of legendary creatures at regular rare since the introduction of mythics in Shards of Alara.
(3/3) Balance - I see this card as very well balanced. The stats look fine, and I especially appreciate the fact that you're preventing abuse of the last ability by charging for it more or less the same amount of mana you usually pay to unmorph things in Tarkir block. Let's say you have a creature with morph in your hand and you manifest it (with this card or any other means). You're not saving a significant amount of mana by using this card's ability to turn it face up rather than what its own morph cost actually is. The same thing is true if you manifest a creature and pay its mana cost to turn it face up. Actually, you might have to pay more mana if you want to use this card's ability. I think all of this would make the card safe to print. In limited, you would always play this as long as you can reliably cast it even though I don't think it qualifies as a bomb. It could see a little constructed play, but only in Standard, I can't really see this in older formats (that's not necessarily a bad thing). I see no problems in casual or multiplayer.
Creativity
(1/3) Uniqueness - As often happens, we've seen all effects by themselves multiple times, they've just never been done together in this particular combination. The flavor of a Temur shaman is also something we've already seen a lot of on Tarkir.
(3/3) Flavor - The name is good, even if the first time I instinctively read it as "Rakdos", but that's no big problem. The flavor text is really good, and if you correct the typo at the end of it (see Quality), I could very easily see it printed as is.
Polish
(2/3) Quality - A hyphen is missing in "face-down permanent" (-0.5). There is the hyphen when it's an adjective, there is no hyphen when it's a verb. Look at Ixidron to see both on the same card, and notice how there's no hyphen in the first ability (verb) but it is there in the second one (adjective). A third-person "s" is missing at the end of the flavor text ("I am the one who listens", -0.5). Manifest could benefit from having reminder text here but it's ok to leave it out on a mythic.
(2/2) Main Challenge - Good.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 20/25
For what it counts, I really like this card personally, even though of course I've tried to be as objective as I could in my judgment. We have to wait for the other judge to know whether you're advancing. If you are, see you in the final round, otherwise prepare your best Kaladesh-inspired designs for next month. Oh well, you should probably do that anyway!
Design
(1.5/3) Appeal - Timmy is the one who wants to cascade, even though he still likes protecting his creatures from removal and enjoys the suspense of cascading anyway, even if it's his opponent who does so. Johnny might be attracted by the inherent strangeness of this card, but I don't actually see a lot to do for him. Spike really likes the protection aspect I talked about for Timmy, and he's also the one who likes messing with his opponent's plans the best, which this card really does. He doesn't like that much the outcome being random though, and himself having no control over it, not even in deckbuilding, as the outcome depends on the opponent's deck and not his own. I think that if there is one kind of player who will definitely be excited by this card, it will be the only kind of player I hate: the griefers (technically a subset of Timmy).
(1/3) Elegance - As a full detail-obsessed Melvin, I really like how the two abilities interact with each other: this counters all spells your opponents cast from their hands, but cascade actually casts the spell from exile. While I personally love such details, I have to say this card doesn't look that intuitive at first glance ("Why would I want my opponent to cascade? I want to cascade! But I also want to counter my opponent's spells..."). At least, both abilities are very clear in what they do. There's no real comprehension complexity here, it's just that some players might be perplex by this card and they might think they are missing something while they actually are not.
Development
(2/3) Viability - Cascade is in all colors, and abilities similar to the last ones have been seen mostly in blue but also in white, never in black though. Black makes a lot of sense for this card flavorfully (see Flavor), but I see nothing that's mechanically black here. The presence of black could be justified by the "I'm messing with you" feeling this card definitely has, but this card could probably also just be a white/blue card like the original Gwafa Hazid was, or even a monoblue card. Rarity is definitely right, I wouldn't want to see anything like this below mythic, not even at regular rare.
(1/3) Balance - The mana cost looks high enough for this card to be safe at its stats. I'm not sure I would play this in my limited deck even if I were in its colors. The first ability really looks like a drawback, and I don't know if the second ability is enough to make up for it at its cost. Also, it might happen that the spell your opponent cascades into is actually better for them/worse for you (those are the same thing, just from different points of view) than the original one that has been countered. In constructed, you can build around it, but ironically the best way of building around this card seems using fateseal effects, which are known for being one of the most unfun things you can do in Magic. This card is also not that fun in general from the other side of the table, even by itself and without fateseal. It can completely disrupt your opponent's plans and the way they wanted to play the game, which can be fun for you but it definitely is not if you put yourself in their shoes. This point is even amplified in multiplayer, where there are multiple opponents for which the game will become unfun until they somehow remove this card, and even that is out of their control as it will depend on what they cascade into, and they have not built their deck with cascade in mind, so they will have to just get lucky. Turning Magic, which is a game where both luck and skill matter, into a game of pure luck doesn't look that good of an idea to me. Obviously, all of this is just my own opinion and I might be wrong. As they say, I'm just human after all. What I do know is that I personally would definitely feel frustated having to play against this card.
Creativity
(3/3) Uniqueness - The way this card works is definitely unique.
(3/3) Flavor - I remember this guy from Alara, and I just went back to read about him in his wiki page just to refresh my memories. Well, if that description is not one of an Esper-colored character, I don't know what it is. I think the only reason his original card is not black is because he's from Bant, where black mana is missing. On any other plane, or post-Conflux Alara, he would definitely have some black in him, so this card works perfectly from a flavor standpoint. The flavor text is also very good and fitting with his story.
Polish
(0.5/3) Quality - Four unnecessary line breaks (4 x -0.5 = -2). P/T should not be bold (-0.5).
(2/2) Main Challenge - Good.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 16/25
In my opinion, the problem of this card is not the Quality score, even though it doesn't help, but the unfun aspect. I don't know if that will cause your elimination as we have to wait for the other judge's scores, but from my point of view the unfun aspect of this card is a real problem which is still there even if you end up advancing. Should you be eliminated, no need to worry, a new MCC will begin in just a few days, and I hope to see you there anyway. Prepare your best Kaladesh-inspired designs!
In decreasing order for both pairings, wait for the other judges to see who's advancing.
Marco: 21.5
Groovelord: 15.5
netn10: 20
Vertain: 16
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.)
(2.5/3) Appeal: Making a legendary 3-color card will always find some appreciation from the commander crowd. Timmy might like putting his big guys out there. Johnny might find ways to use this as well. Spike could like the value of making all cards in hand into 2/2s.
(2/3) Elegance: A pretty straightforward concept with the manifesting and turning. Then there's the random 'draw a card' line out of nowhere.
Development -
(2/3) Viability: Manifesting cards is in any color. Prying them open hasn't been done in such a long time, one can't say for sure where that belongs. It feels like that is because it's developmentally problematic, but really, Skirk Alarmist never caused anyone trouble, so it can't be that bad.
So while this card doesn't need its three colors, it's still justified by the power of the effect. What I dislike about the card is manifesting from your hand. A big part of the fun that came from manifest was doing it off the top of your library, never knowing what you get. Keeping the opponent guessing. I feel like you really missed out on this.
(2/3) Balance: So this grants a rather pricy morph to all of your cards. Not very powerful. But neat doing it at instant speed. I'm not sure how abusable the 6 mana turn up effect is. There's not too many cards that cost a lot more than 6 mana, and you're paying effectivly 9 mana.
The card feels awkward. 6 mana is so much, yet anything less would be too easy to abuse because of the first activated ability. I feel like this wants to be closer to Ixidor, Reality Sculptor and by manifesting from your library you could have went for that.
Creativity -
(1.5/3) Uniqueness: Rather reminiscent of Ixidor. Manifesting cards from your hand is a twist though.
(2/3) Flavor: The name is a good fit, even though mysteries have been more associated with the Sultai, not so much with the blunt Temur. The flavortext feels off. He's not doing a whole lot with lands and doesn't strike me as the listener. He's quite active in what he does.
Polish -
(2.5/3) Quality: listens (-0.5)
Just putting the name of the legendary in short text like that, without having the whole name written out before always looks so wrong to me, but I believe there's precedent?
I'm not going to check through heaps of legendaries though just to find the two exceptions that confirm this, so you get the benefit of the doubt instead.
I'll let it slide this time, but Manifest really requires remindertext.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Looks good.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met.
Total: 18.5/25
(2/3) Appeal: There's certainly a crowd that appreciates chaos. Commander players will like a 3-color legendary. Spike sees the crippling power of this. Spike also gets really upset at the randomness in his games. Not as much as Johnny though. Pretty much destroyed all his hopes and dreams with this one.
(1/3) Elegance: Giving your opponents spells cascade and then counter them is just trying to be clever. That's a very cryptic way to spell "Whenever an opponent casts a spell from his or her hand, counter that spell, then that player exiles cards from the top of his or her library until he or she exiles a nonland card that costs less. That player may cast that card without paying its mana cost. Then he or she puts all cards exiled this way on the bottom of his or her library in a random order."
It may be 'elegant' as in short, but elegance is about making a card understandable. You are far from that.
Development -
(1.5/3) Viability: Chaos is red. Possibility Storm is red. With your color combination you couldn't be further off. I guess blue makes sense for tricky-ness.
(1.5/3) Balance: Oh boy, this doesn't seem right. 6 mana may be excessive and 2/3 easy to remove, but have you every played with a Possibility Storm on the board? Nothing works out anymore.
And yours even reduces the cost of the card, rendering any 1 mana spell virtually useless. Most decks play on a curve and won't run too many overly situational cards, so this might not utterly destroy them.
It still makes it very hard to get rid of it. You have to consider that it already counters any card your opponents may have kept in their hand to deal with anything. Any plan ruined. This is devastating.
Creativity -
(1.5/3) Uniqueness: One sided Possibility Storm. In all fairness, it's a twist on Cascade that hasn't been done.
(3/3) Flavor: So he made it, huh. I like the flavor of counteracting your opponents every move, twisting it into something else.
It's so spot on, that I'm going to ignore the sloppiness of the flavortext. It has the right idea, but the execution is a bit lacking in eloquence.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Looks good.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Very wedgy.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met.
Total: 17.5/25
(2/3) Appeal: Sure, Spike will enjoy this.
(2.5/3) Elegance: You'll have to make the connection what it means to cycle this. Something like "You may cast ~ as though it had flash if you pay 3 more to cast it. If you do, draw a card when you cast it." would have been more clear, but obviously would miss out on cycling synergies.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: "Flash" fits well into these colors. The colors combined justify the powerful card.
(3/3) Balance: Comparable to Mantis Rider. Instead of vigilance and haste you get an additional toughness and a mana sink option.
Creativity -
(1/3) Uniqueness: Sure, it's a cool thing to make of cycling, but the effect really doesn't make for something overly new. It's just pay for flash.
(1.5/3) Flavor: Huh, so THAT's a Amesha. Really had room for flavortext there.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Looks good.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Shardy.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Yep.
Total: 20/25
(3/3) Appeal: Timmy might enjoy a way to get his goods on the board. Johnny likes the deck building incentive. Spike likes the value. Neat.
(1.5/3) Elegance: There's way too much going on. The upkeep trigger lets you choose which creature you want to buff. Putting it on the creature you just manifested would be much more straight forward and wouldn't make much of a difference.
The sac effect fits well into the theme, but then goes on with this weird loot effect that seems a bit random. I'd like a design like this to be more streamlined.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: Manifest is in any color. Spreading counters like that is green, the loot blue and haste red. So I'd say the colors are spot on, even though you tried a bit too hard with the blue part. Rare is a good fit, Mythic would have been a stretch.
(3/3) Balance: 6 mana is costly for a 3/3 haste each turn. The potential when getting a creature is nice. I'd still say this sits at a good spot. It's not overly competetive, but it'd find a home in some more casual or limited decks.
Creativity -
(1.5/3) Uniqueness: This is very close to Whisperwood Elemental. A repeated Manifest trigger and the option to sac to give your dudes a boost. The upkeep trigger with the haste does make for a nice twist though.
(2/3) Flavor: Neat name, missing the flavor text.
Polish -
(2/3) Quality: The first ability requires a target when the ability goes on the stack, well before any card gets manifested. I don't think that's intended.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Wedge alright, don't forget to indicate your picked option next time.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met.
Total: 20/25
RaikouRider 20 vs. sperlman 20
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
Design – (2.5/6)
(1.5/3) Appeal: Timmy likes manifest, and also likes the idea of a 2/2 creature and a counter each turn. It’s a bit too costly for Spike to care much about it. Johnny might be able to find something to do with all those +1/+1 counters and “free” creatures, but I’m not so sure.
(1/3) Elegance: It certainly is a wordy card, but it’s not too difficult to grasp. New players may have a bit of a hard time understanding that, no matter how many face down creatures he connects with, he still only gets to loot two cards. Also, because the target for the +1/+1 counter needs to be chosen when the ability is put onto the stack, this won’t actually be able to put the +1/+1 counter on the face-down creature that was just put onto the battlefield. I feel like a lot of players may find that confusing and unintuitive. Because of this, I think the +1/+1 counter from the first ability should go onto the card that was just manifested instead of “target facedown creature”, especially because it also gives the creature haste. Since this is occurring during your upkeep, there aren’t a lot of scenarios in which giving another face-down creature haste would come into play. In all, this card seems a bit like a bunch of abilities mashed together that don’t necessarily seem to jive in any way other than they all effect facedown creatures.
Development – (5/6)
(3/3) Viability: Any color can have manifest, green puts out +1/+1 counters, blue cycles, and red gives haste, so everything seems in color. Rare seems right also. I don’t see any rules problems.
(2/3) Balance: I don’t think this card is broken in any way. As a matter of fact, it seems a bit weak to me. I think the “free” creature each turn is much more powerful than the activated ability. I think maybe that might only be activated in response to it being targeted with removal. It would see play in limited if you could afford to run all three of these colors. Although I’m not sure it is powerful enough to commit to three colors early in draft, nor is it powerful enough to add a third color if you opened it late, but if you were already in these colors when you opened it, it is an auto-include. I don’t see it being played much in any other formats (except maybe a bit in EDH), so I see no problems there. Maybe it could see a bit of Standard play if a manifest/morph deck hit the big time.
Creativity – (3/6)
(1.5/3) Uniqueness: Nothing here seems particularly inventive, but all of these abilities have never been on a card together, so there’s that.
(1.5/3) Flavor: No room for flavor text. The name is good.
Polish – (7/7)
(3/3) Quality: Looks good, although I question whether you intended for the +1/+1 counter to be able to go on the just manifested creature, but technically everything works here.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Good
(2/2) Subchallenges: You bethca.
Total: 17.5/25
Design – (5/6)
(2.5/3) Appeal: Timmy appreciates the beating he will lay on his opponents with this. Spike does too, although he’s not sure it’s worth the three color investment. Not much here for Johnny.
(2.5/3) Elegance: Pretty straight forward, although I feel like stacking the cycling triggers may cause some confusion.
Development – (5/6)
(2.5/3) Viability: Cycling can be seen in all colors, so no problem there. I’m not sure the “reanimation” ability really makes sense in Bant though. The blue kinda makes sense since this is basically just a glorified Gryff Vanguard, but because the card comes back from your graveyard, maybe monowhite, monoblack, B/W or even Esper or Grixsis might make more sense. All of these combinations would still make sense with round-a-bout flash ability this card has. Still, I don’t think it’s totally beyond the realm of possibility that this card could be printed in Bant colors. Rare seems good for a 3/4 flyer at three CMC with potential upside. It has no rules problems that I can see.
(2.5/3) Balance: A 3/4 flyer for three CMC is a solid beater, but for one more CMC you could have Restoration Angel. For the same CMC you could have Mantis Rider. I don’t really see the cycling/flash ability as too great of an upside at that cost, although it would certainly come into play in the late game. Still, I would say that this is a solid card that would certainly see play in an Alara based limited, which would most assuredly have the mana base to support it. It could perhaps see some Standard play, but it is too weak to see much play anywhere else.
Creativity – (2/6)
(1/3) Uniqueness: There’s nothing really ground breaking here, but all of these affects have never been together on a card before.
(1/3) Flavor: Not a lot of room for flavor text, but I think a one liner could have fit. The name seems Banty.
Polish – (7/7)
(3/3) Quality: Looks good.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Yup.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Good.
Total: 19/25
Results:
RaikouRider - 19
Sperlman - 17.5
Design – (5.5/6)
(2.5/3) Appeal: Timmy likes the massive effect. Johnny loves all of the possibilities this card could create. Flipping a Laboratory Maniac during his upkeep for instance. Spike thinks it’s too expensive.
(3/3) Elegance: Pretty simple and straight forward. The abilities clearly make sense together.
Development – (5/6)
(3/3) Viability: Manifest was seen in all colors, the rest of the card seems red, which is probably fine on a Mardu card. Mythic is correct. It’s a crazy card, but I see no rules problems.
(2/3) Balance: So the bottom line here is, you play this card and you win the game on the spot, if not, you lose right there (or when you draw a card). At nine mana, that might be ok, but I’m not really a fan of card that just wins right then and there, all on its own. It would really upset me in EDH when my opponent has an empty board, but then plays this and just wins right there. I don’t think it would really cause any problems in Standard, or even any of the non-rotating competitive formats, but I do kinda worry a bit about it EDH and casual multi-player.
Creativity – (6/6)
(3/3) Uniqueness: There certainly isn’t anything quite like this card. Ghastly Conscription can manifest a lot of cards at once, but it doesn’t lead to the win now or lose now situation that this card does.
(3/3) Flavor: I really like the flavor here. The name mechanics and flavor text all go together very well. Good job.
Polish – (6.5/7)
(2.5/3) Quality: You have an additional space after the comma (-0.5) I’m just not sure about “manifest all cards of your library”. I don’t know exactly how it should be worded (so I’m not subtracting any points), but the way you have it seems weird. “Manifest each card of your library” might sound better, but I don’t think “manifest each card from your library” works, even though it sounds better to me from an English stand point. Regardless, I can’t really say it’s wrong.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Good.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Yep.
Total: 23/25
Design – (4.5/6)
(2/3) Appeal: Johnny could definitely build something around this. Spike would only play this if Johnny somehow broke it. Timmy doesn’t really see the point.
(2.5/3) Elegance: I could see some players being confused about whether or not this could return itself to your hand if it was sacrificed. Perhaps it should be worded “whenever you sacrifice another creature….” like Nether Traitor is? Other than that everything is good here.
Development – (6/6)
(3/3) Viability: At first glance, this almost looks like it could be an UC, but I think rare is right. Jund is the number one creature sac shard, so all good there. I don’t really see any problems here.
(3/3) Balance: This card seems pretty weak at first, but it is a deceptively powerful mana sink if you have a good sac engine. Of course you probably won’t in limited, so this probably wouldn’t be a very high pick there, although if you were in something like devour (a Jund ability), you would take it. The ability to repeatedly draw a card for would get this card a look in an EDH deck like Prossh, Skyraider of Kher. I could see this getting played as a one or two of in some casual decks too. Maybe even Standard even if there was a viable sac deck in the format. I don’t think the card is strong enough to see play in any of the non-rotating formats.
Creativity – (2.5/6)
(2/3) Uniqueness: There is nothing too shocking here, but the combination of abilities seems pretty fresh.
(1.5/3) Flavor: Name seems fine. There’s no room for flavor text. Still, it manages to feel very Jundy.
Polish – (7/7)
(3/3) Quality: Everything seems fine here.
(2/2) Main Challenge: On point.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Good.
Total: 20/25
Results:
Raptorchan - 23
Voxzorz - 20
Raptorchan VERSUS Voxzorz
(2.5/3) Appeal: This is a Tammy card through and through. I am sure that there would be nothing else quite like just shoving her entire library onto the battlefield after this resolves.
Jenny is appealed by the existence of this card. The only problem for her would be that she would lose access to her library as a library after this card resolves, which she kind of needs in order to keep playing after casting this.
As a Spike myself, I personally am not sure as to whether or not I should dislike, loathe, or hate the very idea of this card, to be perfectly honest.
(2/3) Elegance: I am not sure if elegant is the right word for a card that allows you to empty your whole library onto the battlefield in one go. I just cannot imagine it being elegant. A card like this would just be a big mess if it ever actually resolved in an actual game. The battlefield would be chaos. Then, you would have to actually tap each and every newly manifested card in order to attack with all of them. This card would be so slow to resolve if one wanted to be careful not to damage any sleeves.
On the bright side, this card literally has three lines of rules text.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: This card is definitely in Mardu colors, and it definitely is worthy of being at mythic rare and nothing less.
(2/3) Balance: Aside from likely being absolutely unplayable in limited, this card looks as though it would probably be fine and not break anything in particular in any other format that I can think of.
However, I am not sure if I can say the same for casual or multiplayer formats. Sure, this card could be a lot of fun to cast the first time, maybe the second time as well, but exactly how many times are any opponents going to want to put up with this card? (To be perfectly honest, I would personally prefer ‘zero’, myself.)
Creativity -
(3/3) Uniqueness: If I could somehow award more than three points for this particular criterion here, I probably would.
(3/3) Flavor: CHAAAAARGE!!!!!
Polish -
(2/3) Quality: There is an unnecessary space in between the words “battlefield” and “manifest” in the first line of rules text (yes our judging panel noticed that, minus half a point).
This card is also missing the manifest reminder text (there is room for it on the card, minus half a point). (To manifest a card, put it onto the battlefield face down as a 2/2 creature. Turn it face up any time for its mana cost if it’s a creature card.)
Notably, there are two ways to word the second clause of the first line of rules text. Either “manifest all cards of your library”, which is fine, or ‘manifest all the cards of your library. The first is slightly better wording, while the second is slightly better English. Just a minor, though noteworthy, quibble that I thought was worth mentioning.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Main challenge met!
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both subchallenges met!
Total: 21.5/25
Final thoughts: I personally thought that Worldfire was crazy, but this card is just something else entirely. Oh, dear, has this submission ever so stressed out my usual sensibilities! Forgive me, but I think I would just have to walk away from the table if this card was ever played against me in a game. Even if only for a few minutes, just enough time for a hot cup of soothing chamomile tea. Regardless of my subjectivity, this card was objectively well done.
(2/3) Appeal: Unfortunately, Tammy is bored by this card.
Jenny sees the potential for an engine with this card involving cycling and sacrificing and would consequently be interested.
Spike herself would also be appealed by a playable three mana, three power creature with multiple upsides such as these.
(2.5/3) Elegance: The wording faux-pas that prevents a full elegance score here is that ‘Whenever you sacrifice a creature’ should actually be “Whenever you sacrifice another creature” for the purposes of this card’s presumed intent.
Otherwise, this card is deserving of a near-perfect score for this criterion, indeed.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: This card is definitely Jund in colors and otherwise not blue nor white.
Rare is also a definitely suitable rarity for this card.
(3/3) Balance: This card passes for playable in Limited, provided that you can draft the necessary colors. Constructed formats are where this card really shines, but it does nothing too over the top there that would merit concern.
This card is also fine in casual and multiplayer.
Creativity -
(2/3) Uniqueness: Cycling has been done a lot throughout the history of Magic, but at least the second line of rules text is still relatively unique regardless.
(1.5/3) Flavor: There is no flavor text on this card, and there was indeed a room for at least one line of flavor text, believe it or not. This card’s flavor is suitable and otherwise fine. (Even if I myself would personally prefer ‘Lizard Shaman’ over “Viashino Shaman”.)
Polish -
(2.5/3) Quality: My fellow judge, Flatline, has actually missed a sneaky qualitative error in this card’s rules text. The first line of rules text should be the second and last line of rules text in order to remain consistent with all other cycling creatures (minus half a point).
The only exception that immediately comes to my mind for to this qualitative rule is possibly for creatures that have abilities when they are cycled, which is not the case for this particular card.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Main challenge met!
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both subchallenges met!
Total: 20.5/25
Final thought: Yes, one of my personal pet peeves in Magic is that cards that should be typed as ‘Lizard’ are typed as “Viashino” for some reason that is just beyond my understanding.
Groovelord VERSUS Marco
(1.5/3) Appeal: It really does not get much bigger than nine mana and 8/8 with upsides galore for Timmy.
While this is definitely a card to top off a RGW deck with, there is nothing for Johnny to actually do with this card after he actually casts it.
This is far too expensive for Spike to ever reasonably play; even the ultimatums were a bit of a stretch for her, and those were only seven mana.
(1.5/3) Elegance: This card is pretty straightforward (well, as straightforward as cascade can be at times) aside from the third line of rules text. I disagree with bravelion83 that mentioning ‘the stack’ alone is worth a below-average elegance score, but I agree that it certainly is not worth an above-average score for this criterion.
Development -
(2.5/3) Viability: This card definitely works in Naya colors, and definitely deserves to be mythic rare.
My fellow judge, bravelion83, actually forgot about a relatively recent particular mythic rare card from Magic Origins that mentioned the stack in its reminder text: Day’s Undoing. Hence, I would say that mentioning the stack on a mythic rare is only a rules bend and not a rules break. However, since the aforementioned card is rotating out of Standard very soon with the release of Kaladesh, I doubt that we will see any other cards again that mention the stack explicitly for the time-being, at least.
It is also worth mentioning that the mechanic known as split second is a 7 on the Storm Scale partly just because it mentions the stack. Thus, I would say that mentioning the stack should only be reserved for especially special cases (like Day’s Undoing); I am not entirely sure that this card is one of those special cases.
(1.5/3) Balance: Best of luck in attempting to hard-cast this in Limited for a rather restricted nine total mana.
Honestly, this card is probably not worth nine total mana, believe it or not. If this were eight mana, say 5RGW or something (regardless of the first subchallenge), I as a Spike myself would be at least a little more interested in possibly playing this card, especially since it is still vulnerable to board clears like End Hostilities and Crux of Fate despite the ‘catch-all’ feeling of the third line of rules text.
In my personal experience, hexproof (and, by extension, ‘can’t be countered’) does not contribute to a fun experience around a casual table. I see no problems with this in multiplayer other than the obvious target that you are pasting onto your back by playing this, but there are plenty of other cards that do that as well in multiplayer.
Creativity -
(2/3) Uniqueness: The third line is a pretty weird way to rewrite and perhaps consolidate other, simpler lines of rules text.
Hence, it earns an above-average score for this particular criterion of uniqueness.
(1.5/3) Flavor: There is room for one line of flavor text on this card without the reminder text of cascade. Otherwise, this card earns an average flavor score as-is. Nothing particularly special shone here for me as a Vorthos, yet this card does not have any flavor issues otherwise.
Polish -
(1.5/3) Quality: The first line of rules text, “Cascade”, should actually be the last line of rules text since this card is a permanent (minus half a point). There is no room for cascade reminder text on this particular card, although it would otherwise be required.
The second line of rules text should read ‘Vigilance, trample’ in order to conserve the proper ordering of evergreen keywords (see Tajuru Pathwarden and Oakgnarl Warrior, minus half a point).
The third line of rules text should not use “can’t be targeted by”; this phrase should be replaced with ‘can’t be the target of’ (minus half a point).
(2/2) Main Challenge: Main challenge met!
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both subchallenges met!
Total: 16/25
Final thought: I wonder what, in the same vein, an “Inviolable Colossal” would be like at a mana cost of 9RGW.
(3/3) Appeal: This card is excitingly grand enough for Timmy, intriguingly interesting enough for Johnny, and advantageously playable for Spike. What’s not to love?
(2.5/3) Elegance: The second line of rules text is doomed to prevent a perfect score here, but your cleverness (including the unusual reminder text) really helps bring the score for this criterion to near-perfection.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: Grixis colors make absolutely perfect sense here.
Mythic rare seems just right for such a unique card. If there was previous precedent for a card such as this, maybe it could exist at rare, but there is none as of yet.
(2/3) Balance: Haste feels as though it may be just a little too much on this card, balance-wise. The inclusion of that keyword really pushes this card’s power level to the point where I would be surprised if it did not see Standard play; I would be floored if this card were not regularly first-picked in Limited. It could perhaps work in Modern as well...
Now, who do you attack with this in multiplayer? Commander is probably where this card really shines in order to serve as its rightful home.
I am having trouble thinking of a less fun card to go up against around a casual table, however. Emrakul, the Promised End? Basically, without a timely instant speed counter or removal, one would have to reveal their hand and leave the fate of perhaps their best creature up to the whims of the opponent. So, not exactly the best way to build bridges between two players.
Creativity -
(3/3) Uniqueness: Nothing less than a perfect score will do here for this particular criterion.
(1.5/3) Flavor: No flavor text, yet there was realistically no room for such realistically on this card if it were to ever see print. The name is a little generic (quick, Google “Evard’s Black Tentacles”), but the rules text as least feels somewhat flavorful at least.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Perfect! (Especial thanks are in order from me for the unusual reminder text.)
(2/2) Main Challenge: Main challenge met! (Option A)
(1/2) Subchallenges: Subchallenge 1 met!
Total: 21/25
Final thought: Seriously, where are this legend’s tentacles?
Voxzorz – 21
Marco – 21
Groovelord – 16
Voxzorz — 20.5 + 21 = 41.5
Marco — 21.5 + 21 = 42.5
Groovelord — 15.5 + 16 = 31.5
netn10 — 18.5 + 20 = 38.5
Vertain — 17.5 + 16 = 33.5
RaikouRider — 19 + 20 = 39
sperlman — 17.5 + 20 = 37.5