(This month's banner is my own elaboration on the art of the card Inventors' Fair, by Jonas De Ro)
October MCC - "The Card Inventors' Fair"
Round 3 - "Unrestricted aether access"
Do you remember when you first heard the announcements for the Fair almost a month ago? We promised you unrestricted aether access to fuel your inventions, and as you can see we delivered. The Consulate always keeps its promises. I always keep my promises too... when it lets me advance my own agenda of course, but I digress. Oh, and by the way, don't worry about where all this aether comes from, we just took it from some underutilized neighborhoods to give it to you, and that's all that matters. Those are almost uninhabited zones, so no one outside is certainly suffering because of this, and anyway even if there are some who are suffering they're surely renegades. Do you think a hateful renegade has more right to access Consulate aether than you, the great inventors who are creating progress for our society? All of this is purely in the interest of progress... So don't worry, and show me, Head Judge Tezzeret, and my Fair Judges what you are capable of doing with all this aether!
Main challenge: design a card with E in its rules text. No other Kaladesh block mechanics, so no fabricate and no Vehicles.
Subchallenge 1: The card has both an ability that produces energy and an ability that lets you spend energy.
Subchallenge 2: The card is an artifact.
For the main challenge, if you put E in the mana cost but not in the rules text, your card will get DQ'ed. Your card needs to have the energy symbol in its rules text, not the mana cost. Also, with the template used in the Kaladesh set, the energy symbol cannot go in the mana cost, it should say "pay E" with "pay" spelled out (and remember that!) and you can't have written words in the mana cost anyway. TLDR: don't put E in the mana cost (it's just a bad idea and doesn't work) and remember the "pay".
Your card will also be automatically DQ'ed if it has fabricate or if it's a Vehicle.
For subchallenge 1, the two abilities can be the same. If you find a way to both produce and spend energy with just one ability, it will count.
For subchallenge 2, your card can have additional card types. It can be an artifact creature for example.
Feel free to ask any questions you might have in the discussion thread.
Your inventions are due within...
Design Deadline: Saturday, October 22nd 23:59 EDT (Oct 23rd 5:30 am EDT: I just PM'ed void_nothing allowing them to post a card within the next few hours and have it count anyway to avoid having an odd number of players. We should really come up with an official way to do the versus round if you end up having an odd number of players...)
You can expect results within...
Judging Deadline: Thursday, October 27nd 23:59 EDT (for the record, this was meant to be Tuesday before the above happened)
I remind you that this round will consist of one-on-one matches in the Fair Arena, each judged by two judges. I can tell you, that's a spectacular venue! And just wait to see what I have in store for your viewing pleasure right there on the final day of the Fair! Just two words: Renegade. Prime. Believe me: you don't want to miss it! But now go to work!
The Consulate also invites you to take note of the following points.
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.
On the use of "create" vs. "put onto the battlefield" for tokens: starting this month, you are expected to use only the "create" wording. If you use the old "put onto the battlefield" wording, you will receive Quality deductions. You have been warned! (especially in a round that heavily involves tokens...)
Your invention will be judged according to the following standard criteria, informally known as the "rubric". For your convenience, you can find it right here in the spoiler below.
Design -
(X/3) Appeal: Do the different player psychographics (Timmy/Johhny/Spike) have a use for the card? (X/3) Elegance: Is the card easily understandable at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
Development - (X/3) Viability: How well does the card fit into the color wheel? Does it break or bend the rules of the game? Is it the appropriate rarity? (X/3) Balance: Does the card have a power level appropriate for contemporary constructed/limited environments without breaking them? Does it play well in casual and multiplayer formats? Does it create or fit into a deck/archetype? Does it create an oppressive environment?
Creativity - (X/3) Uniqueness: Has a card like this ever been printed before? Does it use new mechanics, ideas, or design space? Does it combine old ideas in a new way? Overall, does it feel “fresh”? (X/3) Flavor: Does the name seem realistic for a card? Does the flavor text sound professional? Do all the flavor elements synch together to please Vorthos players?
Polish - (X/3) Quality: Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating. (X/2) *Main Challenge: Was the main challenge satisfied? Was it approached in a unique or interesting way? Does the card fit the intent of the challenge? (X/2) Subchallenges: One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Total: X/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
FAIR JUDGES
bravelion83 (roleplaying Head Judge Tezzeret this month)
Moss_Elemental
Blydden
Indighost
CONTESTANTS The Consulate reminds everyone that only the contestants who passed the second round can submit their new creation in this third round of exhibitions. For your convenience, the list of contestants admitted to this round is as follows:
Flatline
Flintlock
Necarg
soramaro
StonerOfKruphix
Tesco(black)lotus
Vertain
void_nothing
If your name is not on this list, the Consulate thanks you for having participated and invites you to next month's Contest.
JUDGING
Head Judge Tezzeret here. The Consulate informed me we had some organization issues and we had to allow a last minute submission, and allow me to say the Consuls were not that happy about it. You know, "follow the rules" and such... I don't really care. I only follow a rule if it's to my own advantage. But you should always follow them. Don't do like me, I am a bad example, with no ulterior motives of course... anyway, the Consulate also told me the official matching and judging assignments, here they are:
I, Head Judge Tezzeret (bravelion83) will judge:
Flatline vs. Tesco(black)lotus
void_nothing vs. soramaro
Fair Judge Moss_Elementalwill judge:
StonerOfKruphix vs. Vertain
Flatline vs. Tesco(black)lotus
Fair Judge Blyddenwill judge:
void_nothing vs. soramaro
Flintlock vs. Necarg
Fair Judge Indighostwill judge:
Flintlock vs. Necarg
StonerOfKruphix vs. Vertain
Because of what happened, the Consulate also established a newJudging Deadline: Thursday, October 27th 23:59 EDT.Now let's make some victims... ehm, let's go to work, judges!
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.)
Salvager Automaton1BG
Artifact Creature - Construct (R)
At the beginning of each player's upkeep, you may exile target card in that player's graveyard. if you do, you get E(an energy counter).
Pay EEE: Put target card from your graveyard on top of your library. "Fewer remnants, fewer questions." — Gonti, Lord of Luxury
3/3
Aether Bomb
Artifact (R)
: You get (an energy counter).
, Pay any amount of , Sacrifice Aether Bomb: Destroy each nonland permanent with converted mana cost equal to the amount of paid this way. "Look at the size of that thing! I think we're going to need more aether."
(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)
Foresight Lens2
Artifact [Rare]
At the beginning of your end step, you get E(an energy counter) if Foresight Lens is untapped.
Pay X amount of E: Exile the top X cards of your library. Activate this ability only once during your turn. T: Return a card exiled with Foresight Lens to your hand. "I foresee great potential for you."
Mobius Puzzleknot3
Artifact (R)
When Mobius Puzzleknot enters the battlefield, you get E(an energy counter) and it deals 2 damage to each opponent. 3, Sacrifice Mobius Puzzleknot: You get E and Mobius Puzzleknot deals 2 damage to each opponent.
Pay EEE: Return Mobius Puzzleknot from your graveyard to your hand. A puzzle that never truly ends.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My thoughts are with the friends and family of the Orlando Shooting victims and with the rest of the LGBTQA+ community.
Check out my Newborder Peasant Cube here! http://www.cubetutor.com/draft/37467
Necarg, please don't acknowledge this in any way whatsoever.
True Name Mafia (Win),Clan Contest IX Mafia (Win), Bravely Default Mafia (Loss), BOTAS (loss), BfV (Loss), Ace Attourney (loss)
Rules Advisor before they were eradicated
Salvaging Engine4
Artifact (R)
Whenever an artifact you control is put into your graveyard from play, you get E(one energy counter).
Pay EEE, exile an artifact card from your graveyard: Return target artifact from your graveyard to the battlefield tapped. "If you fix it up with some scrap, it'll live for another year." - Huvi, junkyard keeper
Animating Engine6
Artifact (R)
At the beginning of your upkeep, you get E(an energy counter) for each artifact you control.
Pay EEEEEE: Put four +1/+1 counters on target non-creature artifact. It becomes a 0/0 Construct artifact creature until end of turn. The phrase 'self-replicating' isn't given nearly enough respect on Kaladesh.
Humming Aetherblade2
Artifact - Equipment (R)
Whenever Humming Aetherblade enters the battlefield or equipped creature attacks or blocks, you get E(an energy counter).
Pay E: Equipped creature gets +1/+1 until end of turn.
Pay EE: Equipped creature gains first strike, trample, and vigilance until end of turn.
Equip - 3 or Pay EE.
You're welcome. Anyway, this is an exception that is not meant to be a precedent. I only did this because in round 3 we need an even number of players for everything to go smoothly. By the way, we really should find a fair way to do the versus round with an odd number of players... but anyway, back to usual business, and back to Tezzeret!
JUDGING
Head Judge Tezzeret here. The Consulate informed me we had some organization issues and we had to allow a last minute submission, and allow me to say the Consuls were not that happy about it. You know, "follow the rules" and such... I don't really care. I only follow a rule if it's to my own advantage. But you should always follow them. Don't do like me, I am a bad example, with no ulterior motives of course... anyway, the Consulate also told me the official matching and judging assignments, here they are:
I, Head Judge Tezzeret (bravelion83) will judge:
Flatline vs. Tesco(black)lotus
void_nothing vs. soramaro
Fair Judge Moss_Elementalwill judge:
StonerOfKruphix vs. Vertain
Flatline vs. Tesco(black)lotus
Fair Judge Blyddenwill judge:
void_nothing vs. soramaro
Flintlock vs. Necarg
Fair Judge Indighostwill judge:
Flintlock vs. Necarg
StonerOfKruphix vs. Vertain
Because of what happened, the Consulate also established a newJudging Deadline: Thursday, October 27th 23:59 EDT.Now let's make some victims... ehm, let's go to work, judges!
Aether Bomb
Artifact (R)
: You get (an energy counter).
, Pay any amount of , Sacrifice Aether Bomb: Destroy each nonland permanent with converted mana cost equal to the amount of paid this way. "Look at the size of that thing! I think we're going to need more aether."
Design (2.5/3) Appeal - Timmy doesn't care. Johnny could use this for protection, but it's Spike who loves this card. Flexible mass destruction is one of the things he likes the most. (3/3) Elegance - All good.
Development (3/3) Viability - No problems with the color pie: if Ratchet Bomb can exist, this can too. Rarity feels right. (3/3) Balance - Playable in limited I guess, but constructed is where this can shine as you can build your deck around it. I can definitely see this in Standard, it could maybe also see a little play in older formats but not as much as to be oppressive I think. I don't see big problems in casual or multiplayer.
Creativity (1/3) Uniqueness - This is just an energy version of Ratchet Bomb, nothing more. It also heavily reminds me of Engineered Explosives. Both of these are famous cards. (2.5/3) Flavor - Both name and flavor text feel a bit generic to me, but they definitely work, as does the whole concept.
Polish (3/3) Quality - All good. (2/2) Main Challenge - Good. (2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Foresight Lens2
Artifact [Rare]
At the beginning of your end step, you get E(an energy counter) if Foresight Lens is untapped.
Pay X amount of E: Exile the top X cards of your library. Activate this ability only once during your turn. T: Return a card exiled with Foresight Lens to your hand. "I foresee great potential for you."
Design (2.5/3) Appeal - Timmy doesn't care. Johnny likes this for digging his library for combo pieces, and this card does this quite well, and very well in a dedicated energy deck. Spike likes this for card advantage. (2/3) Elegance - A bit on the wordy side, but as short as it can be for what it does. The "if it's untapped" part is also a bit unelegant.
Development (3/3) Viability - No problems with the color pie and rarity looks appropriate. (2/3) Balance - I'm not sure I'd play this in limited, it's potential card advantage but it doesn't affect the board in any way by itself. In constructed it looks much more playable, casual for sure, maybe competitive too if it proves reliable enough in providing card advantage. I see no problems in multiplayer. I'm honestly not sure the "if it's untapped" part is needed for balance. I'd like this card much more without it and I don't think that would cause problems.
Creativity (3/3) Uniqueness - Even without energy, I can't remember any existing card working in a similar way, even if I feel like there must be some. (2/3) Flavor - Both name and flavor text feel a bit too generic to me, but they still work well enough, as does the whole concept.
Polish (2.5/3) Quality - "X amount" is wrong, it should either be "Pay X E" or be "Pay any amount of E" and then say "where X is the amount of E paid this way" (-0.5). (2/2) Main Challenge - Good. (2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Humming Aetherblade2
Artifact - Equipment (R)
Whenever Humming Aetherblade enters the battlefield or equipped creature attacks or blocks, you get E(an energy counter).
Pay E: Equipped creature gets +1/+1 until end of turn.
Pay EE: Equipped creature gains first strike, trample, and vigilance until end of turn.
Equip - 3 or Pay EE.
Design (2.5/3) Appeal - Timmy likes giving additional bonuses to his creatures but I don't really see this card exciting him fully. Johnny likes this as a constant source of energy counters that he can do things with, even though I don't think these are the rewards he's looking for. Spike really likes this for its efficiency and versatility, and also the fact that you can equip this without spending mana. (2/3) Elegance - The first sentence is perfectly functional but a bit hard to read. The card as a whole is also quite wordy.
Development (3/3) Viability - No problems with the color pie and rarity looks appropriate. (2.5/3) Balance - This is certainly playable in limited, and in Standard too I think. Getting energy out of the first ability is very easy and the rewards are quite tempting. I'm glad this costs three mana to equip because of this, but I have to admit the alternative energy-only equip cost scares me a little. I'd want to test that part throughly if I were a real developer. Maybe it turns out it's fine in the end, but there is potential for danger anywhere you provide mana-free alternative costs. I see no problems in casual or multiplayer.
Creativity (2/3) Uniqueness - This vaguely reminds me of Umezawa's Jitte in a sense, and it's also basically an Equipment version of Multiform Wonder. It has its own identity but it has clear inspirations. (1.5/3) Flavor - The name is fine. No room for flavor text.
Polish (1.5/3) Quality - In the equip cost, there should be no spaces before and after the dash (that should be long but I'm ignoring it because of the non-Latin characters restriction), as cards like Nightmare Lash and Sigil of Distinction show us (-0.5). Also, no need to capitalize "Pay" there (-0.5). Finally, the order of keywords should be "first strike, vigilance, trample", as seen on multiple cards. The closest example is Sword of Vengeance (-0.5). (2/2) Main Challenge - Good. (2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Salvaging Engine4
Artifact (R)
Whenever an artifact you control is put into your graveyard from play, you get E(one energy counter).
Pay EEE, exile an artifact card from your graveyard: Return target artifact from your graveyard to the battlefield tapped. "If you fix it up with some scrap, it'll live for another year." - Huvi, junkyard keeper
Design (2/3) Appeal - This is a pure Johnny card. Johnny absolutely loves this card, there is so much he can do with this. Timmy and Spike don't care. (2.5/3) Elegance - You cannot return the card you exile to pay the activated ability's cost, and I can see this being a little confusing to some less experienced players. It's not necessary for function, but adding the word "another" might have helped here.
Development (3/3) Viability - Reanimating artifacts is usually white, but I see no problems with allowing other colors to do it, especially in an artifact block like Kaladesh. It's not like it undermines any color's weakness. Rarity feels right. (2/3) Balance - This cannot generate any loop because of the exile cost, and that's good. This could be playable in limited, but the facts that it doesn't affect the board by itself and that you're not getting card advantage until the second reanimated artifact don't help. In Standard, this could see some play in artifact decks or if some combo exploiting it is found. I can't see this in older formats, I thought about Modern Affinity, but I think this costs too much for that deck. I see no big problem in casual or multiplayer. The big problem would have been eventual loops, but you smartly avoided it.
Creativity (3/3) Uniqueness - Even without energy, I can't remember any existing card working in a similar way, even if I feel like there must be some. (2.5/3) Flavor - The name is fine, even though the word "engine" is a bit generic when it comes to artifacts. A lot of artifacts could be flavored as engines. What I like the most about the flavor of this card is how much the flavor text and the mechanics make sense with each other.
Polish (0/3) Quality - It's been years by noy that the "in-play zone" is called the "battlefield": "…is put into a graveyard from the battlefield" (-1). In the reminder text, it should be "an energy counter", not "one" (-0.5). The cost "Exile an artifact…" should be capitalized (-0.5). In the graveyard there are no "artifacts" but "artifact cards": "return target artifact card..." (-0.5). In the flavor text, the attribution should be in its own line (-0.5). (2/2) Main Challenge - Good. (2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
MCC - Winner (6): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019 || Host (15): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here) || Judge (34): every month from Nov 2014 to Nov 2016 except Oct 2015, every month from Feb to Jul 2017 except Apr 2017, then Oct 2017, May Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here) CCL - Winner (3): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last one here) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016 DCC - Winner (1): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar) || Host (3): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016
• The two public custom sets I've been part a part of the design team for: "Brotherhood of Ormos" - Blog post with all info - set thread - design skeleton / card list || "Extinctia: Homo Evanuit" - Blog post with all info - set thread - card list spreadsheet
• "The Lion's Lair", my article series about MTG and custom card design in particular. Latest article here. Here is the article index.Rather outdated by now, and based on the old MCC rubric, but I'm leaving this here for anybody that might be interested anyway.
• My only public attempt at being a writer: the story of my Leonin custom planeswalker Jeff Lionheart. (I have a very big one that I'm working on right now but that's private for now, and I don't know if I will ever actually publish it, and I also have ideas for multiple future ones, including one where I'm going to reprise Jeff.)
(2/3) Appeal: Spike likes this. Johnny sees combo potential.
(3/3) Elegance: No problems here.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: No problems here.
(1/3) Balance: This card would be sick in a mill deck. Glimpse the Unthinkable alone would get you
Creativity -
(2/3) Uniqueness: The first part is new, as is getting any permanent card from an opponent's graveyard.
(3/3) Flavor: No problems here.
Polish -
(1/3) Quality: The firs line should read “Whenever a card is put into a graveyard from anywhere, you get E.” It should also be “... the amount of E paid this way.” Also, I read your post about the card name. Next time, do a last minute check.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met.
Total: 19/25
Design -
(1.5/3) Appeal: Johnny might find a combo. Spike might play with this.
(3/3) Elegance: No problems here.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: No problems here.
(2/3) Balance: I think the cost of the activated ability should include t, since there are several ways to get E, and it would build up faster in a multiplayer game.
Creativity -
(2/3) Uniqueness: Nothing here that hasn't been done before.
(3/3) Flavor: No problems here.
Polish -
(2.5/3) Quality: “If” should be capitalized.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met
Total: 21/25
Design -
(3/3) Appeal: Timmy likes the mass destruction. Johnny could find a way to ramp up the E collecting. Spike just likes it.
(3/3) Elegance: No problems here.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: No problems here.
(2/3) Balance: Fabrication Module has you paying four mana to get one E. Since it's rare, maybe it could cost less, but it definitely should cost more than just t.
Creativity -
(1/3) Uniqueness: This is too similar to Ratchet Bomb, but I wouldn't be surprised if this was printed.
(3/3) Flavor: No problems here.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: No problems here.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met.
Total: 22/25
Design -
(1/3) Appeal: Spike might like it.
(3/3) Elegance: No problems here.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: No problems here.
(2/3) Balance: The first ability checks if it's untapped. The last ability can be activated at any time. If you wanted the first ability to be effective, the last ability should only be activated during your turn.
Creativity -
(2/3) Uniqueness: Reminds me a little bit of Bane Alley Broker.
(3/3) Flavor: No problems here.
Polish -
(1/3) Quality: I think the second ability should read “Pay any amount of E.” Also, the last ability should read “Return target card exiled with ~ to its owner's hand.” See Bane Alley Broker
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met
Total: 20/25
I think I'll say this is NOT final, but I might not have time to revise this as I'll be busy tomorrow.
Animating Engine6
Artifact (R)
At the beginning of your upkeep, you get E(an energy counter) for each artifact you control.
Pay EEEEEE: Put four +1/+1 counters on target non-creature artifact. It becomes a 0/0 Construct artifact creature until end of turn. The phrase 'self-replicating' isn't given nearly enough respect on Kaladesh.
Design
(2/3) Appeal: Timmy and Johnny alike delight at this quixotic piece. Allowing for exponential boosts of energy and dudes of increasing size! However at six mana, this creation is a touch to expensive for Spike. For him, a six-drop needs to do something NOW. Maybe an energy heavy deck would appreciate this, but the fact that it only boosts NON-creature artifacts lends itself to durdly plays and lots of similarly do-nothing artifacts.
(2/3) Elegance: The energy gain clause took me a second look, before I realized how it worked, and that it counted itself. The one real problem is that the +1/+1 counters stay on the animation target, but said animation only lasts until end of turn. Creating this odd case where there are cards with +1/+1 counters but aren't creatures or even have ways to self-animate. And it doesn't really mesh with Vehicles the way you'd think, being effectively a 4/4 that turn instead of their printed stats.
Development
(3/3) Viability: Bringing themselves and others to life is common ground for artifacts, so no complaints there. Being rare is good too, as the shear quantity of energy it can produce is to be avoided at lower rarities.
(2/3) Balance: Nothing seems busted here, but the distribution of power seems wonky. Compared to the produced energy, the cost for a temporary 4/4, that maybe becomes an 8/8 seems really high here. I know you're supposed to have energy before hand, but needing SIX artifacts and a full turn to get one dude seems underwhelming.
Creativity
(2/3) Uniqueness: The only artifact card that animated other artifacts that comes to mind is Karn, Silver Golem. So there's that. Still, the overall premises feels well-tread, and not terrible innovative.
(2.5/3) Flavor: The name and the flavor text of this card are cohesive. HOWEVER, the "self replicating" part seems absent. It brings to mind exponential growth and an overwhelming rush of machinery, but this card neither clones itself, nor maintains a standing force of bots.
Polish
(3/3) Quality: No infractions found.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met
(2/2) Sub Challenges: Both met. FINAL VERDICT - {21.5/25}
Mobius Puzzleknot3
Artifact (R)
When Mobius Puzzleknot enters the battlefield, you get E(an energy counter) and it deals 2 damage to each opponent. 3, Sacrifice Mobius Puzzleknot: You get E and Mobius Puzzleknot deals 2 damage to each opponent.
Pay EEE: Return Mobius Puzzleknot from your graveyard to your hand. A puzzle that never truly ends.
Design
(2/3) Appeal: The value of this card is ingrained in the concept of slow, but inevitable progression towards an end. Repeated actions, and gradual erosion are the themes of the day. Timmy has no time for this stuff. He want's stuff NOW and this will not do. Thankfully both Johnny and Spike would be more appreciative of this concoctions wondrous applications and ingenuity.
(3/3) Elegance: Comes in: do thing "A". Pay and sacrifice: do thing "A" again. Recur and repeat. Simple and effective.
Development
(3/3) Viability: Artifacts can both hurt, and recur themselves, so no problems there. Combining those things do require higher rarities, but for what you get of this I think rare is fine.
(2.5/3) Balance: Recurring face-shocks are a dangerous thing, especially in any color. So I am glad you put a limiter on this thing, by making it not quite perpetual, and requiring an outside energy source to recur it.
Creativity
(2.5/3) Uniqueness: Ok, this isn't exactly groundbreaking stuff here, but the combination of the two abilities makes things a little interesting. This is comparable to any number of pinger artifacts, but I love this for it simply not going away ever, unless outright exiled.
(3/3) Flavor: YES. I personally love the concept of Mobius Strips and Klien bottles, and their inherent infinite-ness. So a card with a card with a self recursion ability, a fitting name, an in-universe setting, AND a simple but synergistic flavour text hits the sweet spot of Vorthosian goodness.
Polish
(3/3) Quality: No discrepancies found.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met
(2/2) Sub Challenges: Both met. FINAL VERDICT - {23/25}
Esumation Module4
Artifact (MR)
Whenever a card is put into a player's graveyard from anywhere, you gain (an energy counter). T, Pay any amount of : Choose target permanent card in a graveyard. Put it onto the battlefield under your control if its converted mana cost is less than or equal to the amount of energy paid this way. "First rule of the aether cycle: nothing is really wasted."
—Rashmi, Eternities Crafter
Design
(3/3) Appeal: Timmy: Lets rez big creatures! Johnny: Lets get destroyed combo pieces? Maybe self-mill and rez costly things? Spike: Reanimate all the bombs.
(2.5/3) Elegance: Wordy, yes, but necessarily wordy, and at mythic understandably wordy.
Development
(2/3) Viability: Artifacts pulling things from the graveyard is usually limited to equipment or just getting other artifacts. This seems to be stepping out of bounds. Rarity-wise a repeatable rez engine deserves a mythic slot.
(2/3) Balance: The fact that this card can get energy off of anything hitting the graveyard from anywhere is worrisome. It means milling and discard and just casting instants and sorceries nets you energy. This is especially troubling with self-mill, because it gets targets in your bin and gets you energy. This seems a little on the cheap side for that sort of thing.
Creativity
(2.5/3) Uniqueness: A literal reanimation engine is a wondrous thing to behold, and no other artifact to my knowledge does this. I've already mentioned how this may be a bad thing though.
(2/3) Flavor: Being called a module, seems to imply it would fit with the other three Module cards. Which it doesn't. You could have called it an "engine" or "matrix" or any other synonym for machine and it would have worked just as well.
Polish
(2/3) Quality: "Gain" should be "Get" in "You gain E."
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met
(2/2) Sub Challenges: Both met. FINAL VERDICT - {20/25}
Salvager Automaton1BG
Artifact Creature - Construct (R)
At the beginning of each player's upkeep, you may exile target card in that player's graveyard. if you do, you get E(an energy counter).
Pay EEE: Put target card from your graveyard on top of your library. "Fewer remnants, fewer questions." — Gonti, Lord of Luxury
3/3
Design
(1/3) Appeal: Who is this for again? It seems to be its own nonbo. Eating the cards it intends to recur? Yes, you can choose not to exile your own cards, but that seems too slow. Also, to the top of your library rather than to hand? Maybe there's some Johnny shenanigans to be had with miracles?
(3/3) Elegance: "The each-turn" trigger seems straight forward enough. The recursion ability, while underwhelming, is not confusing.
Development
(3/3) Viability: Since its a colored artifact, and in the colors of recursion, the color wheel is appeased. Rarity is also fine.
(1.5/3) Balance: Rather hard to say, but largely this leaves a far deal to be desired. Mostly its the fact that the recursion replaces your own draw and therefore isn't really card advantage. But there is also the problem that most cards that allow recursion of themselves, exile on resolution. This seems somehow, both boring and dangerous.
Creativity
(1.5/3) Uniqueness: Green and black know recursion like the back of their hands, so nothing new there. On a body? Eternal Witness says hello. Now continuous recursion? Hmm, interesting.
(2/3) Flavor: Um, Gonti isn't green last I checked. Yes, this is something he might employ, but that still seems odd to me.
Polish
(3/3) Quality: No discrepancies found.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met
(2/2) Sub Challenges: Both met. FINAL VERDICT - {19/25}
Humming Aetherblade2
Artifact - Equipment (R)
Whenever Humming Aetherblade enters the battlefield or equipped creature attacks or blocks, you get E(an energy counter).
Pay E: Equipped creature gets +1/+1 until end of turn.
Pay EE: Equipped creature gains first strike, trample, and vigilance until end of turn.
Equip - 3 or Pay EE.
Design - (2/3) Appeal: Timmy particularly likes equipment, but to say that he would be particularly appealed by this card is a stretch. Johnny likes energy engines that are also versatile, but this card does not necessarily appeal to him either. No, this card more appeals to Spike; she can make great use of this card’s versatility. (2/3) Elegance: This card is rather wordy for what it is trying to do, and it also does a lot of things all in rules text box, which also feels a little unnecessary.
Development - (3/3) Viability: Appropriately colorless and appropriately rare. (3/3) Balance: This card is well-balanced. It looks intimidating at first until one realizes that it is very average with only its own energy, yet this card is also quite great with more sources of energy, just like all of the other energy cards. This card is well done in that sense.
Creativity - (3/3) Uniqueness: An equipment that costs energy to equip feels like low-hanging fruit in terms of creativity, but since Wizards of the Coast has not printed any such artifact as of yet, here is your perfect score. (3/3) Flavor: Even without flavor text (which would not fit on the card if it were to see print anyway), this card is wonderfully flavorful for my inner Vorthos as-is. The flavor and mechanics work very well together here.
Polish - (1.5/3) Quality: For the third line of rules text, the keywords should be in the order of ‘first strike, vigilance, and trample’ (minus half a point).
In the fourth line of rules text, the dash [which should be a long dash ‘–‘] should not have spaces to either the left nor the right of it (minus half a point). Also, the word “Pay” in this very same line of rules text should not be capitalized (minus half a point). (2/2) Main Challenge: Main challenge met! (2/2) Subchallenges: Both subchallenges met!
Total: 21.5/25
Final thoughts: Did you know that Torch Gauntlet was originally designed to be Kaladesh’s ‘pay energy to equip’ equipment? Development changed it since it did not add anything in particular to Kaladesh as a set, yet I remain optimistic that I will see a ‘pay energy to equip’ equipment be printed someday in the future regardless.
Salvaging Engine4
Artifact (R)
Whenever an artifact you control is put into your graveyard from play, you get E(one energy counter).
Pay EEE, exile an artifact card from your graveyard: Return target artifact from your graveyard to the battlefield tapped. "If you fix it up with some scrap, it'll live for another year." - Huvi, junkyard keeper
Design - (2/3) Appeal: Jenny loves this card; Jenny loves this card so much that saying it both appeals and excites her is still a definite understatement.
As for Tammy, this card bores her; this card has no body and does nothing particularly big at first glance. Spike would keep an eye on this card and wait to see as to whether or not Jenny could come up with any particularly powerful deck that uses this card as a key component. (2/3) Elegance: The lack of the word ‘another’ missing from the second instance of the word “artifact” in the second line of rules text may not be a qualitative error necessarily, but it is an inelegance. All of the old and outdated rules text that this card bears here is enough to not only detract from this card’s quality score yet also from its elegance score as well.
Development - (3/3) Viability: This card works perfectly fine as colorless. It is also appropriately at least a rare in terms of rarity. (2/3) Balance: This card is smartly balanced on a knife’s edge. It is a card advantage engine that requires a commitment from the deck, yet it cannot create any degenerative loops by itself. Perhaps it can still be abused somehow outside of this card’s original intent, even if nothing immediately comes to mind. Just because nothing breaks this card yet does not mean that nothing could potentially do so in the future, however. Admittedly, this card is already pressurized due to clues and servos and other tokens that do also enter the graveyard from the battlefield...even if they cease to exist after state-based actions (and hence cannot fuel the second ability), it is a worrisome qualm.
Creativity - (3/3) Uniqueness: You would think that Wizards of the Coast would have created something like this already. Yet, no, they have not. (2/3) Flavor: The name is a little generic, and so is the flavor text. I would call the card functional but I would not call it particularly flavorful. The flavor works here but does nothing extra special in particular for my inner Vorthos.
Polish - (0/3) Quality: For the first line of rules text: “from play” should instead be ‘from the battlefield’ (minus one point). The word “one” in the energy counter reminder text should also instead be ‘an’ (minus half a point).
For the second line of rules text: the word “exile” should be capitalized (minus half a point). The word ‘card’ is missing between the second instance of the word “artifact” and “from” (minus half a point).
For the flavor text: the name [plus title] of the individual credited with the quotation of flavor text requires its own line (minus half a point). There should also be no space between the dash [which should be a long dash ‘–‘] and the name (minus half a point). (2/2) Main Challenge: Main challenge met! (2/2) Subchallenges: Both subchallenges met!
Total: 18/25
Final thoughts: What if I fix it up with a lot of scrap? Will it live even longer?
Animating Engine6
Artifact (R)
At the beginning of your upkeep, you get E(an energy counter) for each artifact you control.
Pay EEEEEE: Put four +1/+1 counters on target non-creature artifact. It becomes a 0/0 Construct artifact creature until end of turn. The phrase 'self-replicating' isn't given nearly enough respect on Kaladesh.
Design - (2/3) Appeal: Timmy likes cards like this that do a lot. Johnny also likes cards that can generate tons of energy and can also use those tons of energy just as well.
On the other hand, Spike finds this card to be disappointingly lacking for six mana at a rarity of rare. (2/3) Elegance: Firstly, this card counts itself in its first line of rules text, and since that is so easily missed upon a first reading, I have to count it as an inelegance. Secondly, this card does not intuitively work with vehicles like it perhaps should (they actually become 4/4s until end of turn).
Development - (3/3) Viability: This card works quite fine as a colorless artifact. Similarly, this card also is suitable at a rarity of rare. (2/3) Balance: This card is a little underpowered for six mana as a rare. At five mana, I would be more inclined to give this card a perfect balance score. This card does generate a lot of energy and a lot of +1/+1 counters, but this card by itself does a lot less on average, even with a lot of energy already stockpiled.
Creativity - (2.5/3) Uniqueness: This card is quite unique. Only one other card immediately comes to mind like this one, which is Karn, Silver Golem. (2/3) Flavor: This card is rather flavorful (aside from the name, which is a little generic), but the flavor of this card as a whole is contradictory with itself. How exactly does it do anything that I could call ‘replication’?
Polish - (2.5/3) Quality: My fellow judge Indighost missed this, but “non-creature” does not require a hyphen (minus half a point, see Monastery Swiftspear, Metalwork Colossus, et cetera). (2/2) Main Challenge: Main challenge met! (2/2) Subchallenges: Both subchallenges met!
Total: 20/25
Final thoughts: I wish that this card had been decidedly pushed instead of pulled. Four +1/+1 counters on an artifact creature or a vehicle or a non-Vehicle noncreature artifact that becomes a 0/0 creature for six energy is an exciting concept.
Mobius Puzzleknot3
Artifact (R)
When Mobius Puzzleknot enters the battlefield, you get E(an energy counter) and it deals 2 damage to each opponent. 3, Sacrifice Mobius Puzzleknot: You get E and Mobius Puzzleknot deals 2 damage to each opponent.
Pay EEE: Return Mobius Puzzleknot from your graveyard to your hand. A puzzle that never truly ends.
Design - (2/3) Appeal: Timmy is very bored by this small card. Both Johnny and Spike on the other hand each appreciate this card’s usefulness in both generating energy and an eventual win condition. It is potentially worth building around for Johnny and serves as another nice energy incentive for Spike. (3/3) Elegance: No inelegances here.
Development - (3/3) Viability: This card can exist as a colorless card without much of a question at all. Allfiveofthepuzzleknots were originally printed at common, but thank goodness this has been printed at rare instead. (2/3) Balance: Thank goodness this card does not repeat ad infinitum without outside sources of energy. This card requires a total of 30 generic mana and EEEE(four energy counters) before it can win the game under normal circumstances. This of course can be more or less in either a Two-Headed Giant, Commander, or other alternate game mode. Anyway, this is fast enough to attempt to build around yet slow enough that it will not break anything in particular. The only issue that I truly have with this card is a lack of counter play other than the usual tactic of being rushed down. Typical artifact removal nor typical counter spells work since this card can just be returned to hand once more with enough energy. Specific sideboard cards would be closer to what would be required to play against this specific card.
Creativity - (2/3) Uniqueness: The puzzleknot cycle is already complete, but this addition is a welcome one regardless. These effects have each been done before, but by putting them together something comparatively unique has been found. (3/3) Flavor: There is nothing here that I do not find flavorful as a Vorthos. Bravo!
Polish - (3/3) Quality: Perfect! (2/2) Main Challenge: Main challenge met! (2/2) Subchallenges: Both subchallenges met!
Total: 22/25
Final thought: I kind of wish that there had been an official colorless puzzleknot in Kaladesh right about now.
MCC - Winner (6): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019 || Host (15): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here) || Judge (34): every month from Nov 2014 to Nov 2016 except Oct 2015, every month from Feb to Jul 2017 except Apr 2017, then Oct 2017, May Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here) CCL - Winner (3): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last one here) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016 DCC - Winner (1): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar) || Host (3): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016
• The two public custom sets I've been part a part of the design team for: "Brotherhood of Ormos" - Blog post with all info - set thread - design skeleton / card list || "Extinctia: Homo Evanuit" - Blog post with all info - set thread - card list spreadsheet
• "The Lion's Lair", my article series about MTG and custom card design in particular. Latest article here. Here is the article index.Rather outdated by now, and based on the old MCC rubric, but I'm leaving this here for anybody that might be interested anyway.
• My only public attempt at being a writer: the story of my Leonin custom planeswalker Jeff Lionheart. (I have a very big one that I'm working on right now but that's private for now, and I don't know if I will ever actually publish it, and I also have ideas for multiple future ones, including one where I'm going to reprise Jeff.)
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
(This month's banner is my own elaboration on the art of the card Inventors' Fair, by Jonas De Ro)
October MCC - "The Card Inventors' Fair"
Round 3 - "Unrestricted aether access"
Do you remember when you first heard the announcements for the Fair almost a month ago? We promised you unrestricted aether access to fuel your inventions, and as you can see we delivered. The Consulate always keeps its promises. I always keep my promises too... when it lets me advance my own agenda of course, but I digress. Oh, and by the way, don't worry about where all this aether comes from, we just took it from some underutilized neighborhoods to give it to you, and that's all that matters. Those are almost uninhabited zones, so no one outside is certainly suffering because of this, and anyway even if there are some who are suffering they're surely renegades. Do you think a hateful renegade has more right to access Consulate aether than you, the great inventors who are creating progress for our society? All of this is purely in the interest of progress... So don't worry, and show me, Head Judge Tezzeret, and my Fair Judges what you are capable of doing with all this aether!
Main challenge: design a card with E in its rules text. No other Kaladesh block mechanics, so no fabricate and no Vehicles.
Subchallenge 1: The card has both an ability that produces energy and an ability that lets you spend energy.
Subchallenge 2: The card is an artifact.
For the main challenge, if you put E in the mana cost but not in the rules text, your card will get DQ'ed. Your card needs to have the energy symbol in its rules text, not the mana cost. Also, with the template used in the Kaladesh set, the energy symbol cannot go in the mana cost, it should say "pay E" with "pay" spelled out (and remember that!) and you can't have written words in the mana cost anyway.
TLDR: don't put E in the mana cost (it's just a bad idea and doesn't work) and remember the "pay".
Your card will also be automatically DQ'ed if it has fabricate or if it's a Vehicle.
For subchallenge 1, the two abilities can be the same. If you find a way to both produce and spend energy with just one ability, it will count.
For subchallenge 2, your card can have additional card types. It can be an artifact creature for example.
Feel free to ask any questions you might have in the discussion thread.
Your inventions are due within...
Design Deadline:
Saturday, October 22nd 23:59 EDT(Oct 23rd 5:30 am EDT: I just PM'ed void_nothing allowing them to post a card within the next few hours and have it count anyway to avoid having an odd number of players. We should really come up with an official way to do the versus round if you end up having an odd number of players...)You can expect results within...
Judging Deadline: Thursday, October 27nd 23:59 EDT (for the record, this was meant to be Tuesday before the above happened)
I remind you that this round will consist of one-on-one matches in the Fair Arena, each judged by two judges. I can tell you, that's a spectacular venue! And just wait to see what I have in store for your viewing pleasure right there on the final day of the Fair! Just two words: Renegade. Prime. Believe me: you don't want to miss it! But now go to work!
The Consulate also invites you to take note of the following points.
Your invention will be judged according to the following standard criteria, informally known as the "rubric". For your convenience, you can find it right here in the spoiler below.
(X/3) Appeal: Do the different player psychographics (Timmy/Johhny/Spike) have a use for the card?
(X/3) Elegance: Is the card easily understandable at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
Development -
(X/3) Viability: How well does the card fit into the color wheel? Does it break or bend the rules of the game? Is it the appropriate rarity?
(X/3) Balance: Does the card have a power level appropriate for contemporary constructed/limited environments without breaking them? Does it play well in casual and multiplayer formats? Does it create or fit into a deck/archetype? Does it create an oppressive environment?
Creativity -
(X/3) Uniqueness: Has a card like this ever been printed before? Does it use new mechanics, ideas, or design space? Does it combine old ideas in a new way? Overall, does it feel “fresh”?
(X/3) Flavor: Does the name seem realistic for a card? Does the flavor text sound professional? Do all the flavor elements synch together to please Vorthos players?
Polish -
(X/3) Quality: Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
(X/2) *Main Challenge: Was the main challenge satisfied? Was it approached in a unique or interesting way? Does the card fit the intent of the challenge?
(X/2) Subchallenges: One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Total: X/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
FAIR JUDGES
bravelion83 (roleplaying Head Judge Tezzeret this month)
Moss_Elemental
Blydden
Indighost
CONTESTANTS
The Consulate reminds everyone that only the contestants who passed the second round can submit their new creation in this third round of exhibitions. For your convenience, the list of contestants admitted to this round is as follows:
Flatline
Flintlock
Necarg
soramaro
StonerOfKruphix
Tesco(black)lotus
Vertain
void_nothing
If your name is not on this list, the Consulate thanks you for having participated and invites you to next month's Contest.
JUDGING
Head Judge Tezzeret here. The Consulate informed me we had some organization issues and we had to allow a last minute submission, and allow me to say the Consuls were not that happy about it. You know, "follow the rules" and such... I don't really care. I only follow a rule if it's to my own advantage. But you should always follow them. Don't do like me, I am a bad example, with no ulterior motives of course... anyway, the Consulate also told me the official matching and judging assignments, here they are:
I, Head Judge Tezzeret (bravelion83) will judge:
Flatline vs. Tesco(black)lotus
void_nothing vs. soramaro
Fair Judge Moss_Elemental will judge:
StonerOfKruphix vs. Vertain
Flatline vs. Tesco(black)lotus
Fair Judge Blydden will judge:
void_nothing vs. soramaro
Flintlock vs. Necarg
Fair Judge Indighost will judge:
Flintlock vs. Necarg
StonerOfKruphix vs. Vertain
Because of what happened, the Consulate also established a new Judging Deadline: Thursday, October 27th 23:59 EDT. Now let's make some victims... ehm, let's go to work, judges!
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.)
Artifact Creature - Construct (R)
At the beginning of each player's upkeep, you may exile target card in that player's graveyard. if you do, you get E (an energy counter).
Pay EEE: Put target card from your graveyard on top of your library.
"Fewer remnants, fewer questions."
— Gonti, Lord of Luxury
3/3
Artifact (R)
: You get (an energy counter).
, Pay any amount of , Sacrifice Aether Bomb: Destroy each nonland permanent with converted mana cost equal to the amount of paid this way.
"Look at the size of that thing! I think we're going to need more aether."
Artifact [Rare]
At the beginning of your end step, you get E (an energy counter) if Foresight Lens is untapped.
Pay X amount of E: Exile the top X cards of your library. Activate this ability only once during your turn.
T: Return a card exiled with Foresight Lens to your hand.
"I foresee great potential for you."
Artifact (R)
When Mobius Puzzleknot enters the battlefield, you get E (an energy counter) and it deals 2 damage to each opponent.
3, Sacrifice Mobius Puzzleknot: You get E and Mobius Puzzleknot deals 2 damage to each opponent.
Pay EEE: Return Mobius Puzzleknot from your graveyard to your hand.
A puzzle that never truly ends.
Check out my Newborder Peasant Cube here! http://www.cubetutor.com/draft/37467
True Name Mafia (Win),Clan Contest IX Mafia (Win), Bravely Default Mafia (Loss), BOTAS (loss), BfV (Loss), Ace Attourney (loss)
Rules Advisor before they were eradicated
Artifact (R)
Whenever an artifact you control is put into your graveyard from play, you get E (one energy counter).
Pay EEE, exile an artifact card from your graveyard: Return target artifact from your graveyard to the battlefield tapped.
"If you fix it up with some scrap, it'll live for another year." - Huvi, junkyard keeper
Artifact (R)
At the beginning of your upkeep, you get E (an energy counter) for each artifact you control.
Pay EEEEEE: Put four +1/+1 counters on target non-creature artifact. It becomes a 0/0 Construct artifact creature until end of turn.
The phrase 'self-replicating' isn't given nearly enough respect on Kaladesh.
Humming Aetherblade 2
Artifact - Equipment (R)
Whenever Humming Aetherblade enters the battlefield or equipped creature attacks or blocks, you get E (an energy counter).
Pay E: Equipped creature gets +1/+1 until end of turn.
Pay EE: Equipped creature gains first strike, trample, and vigilance until end of turn.
Equip - 3 or Pay EE.
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
You're welcome. Anyway, this is an exception that is not meant to be a precedent. I only did this because in round 3 we need an even number of players for everything to go smoothly. By the way, we really should find a fair way to do the versus round with an odd number of players... but anyway, back to usual business, and back to Tezzeret!
JUDGING
Head Judge Tezzeret here. The Consulate informed me we had some organization issues and we had to allow a last minute submission, and allow me to say the Consuls were not that happy about it. You know, "follow the rules" and such... I don't really care. I only follow a rule if it's to my own advantage. But you should always follow them. Don't do like me, I am a bad example, with no ulterior motives of course... anyway, the Consulate also told me the official matching and judging assignments, here they are:
I, Head Judge Tezzeret (bravelion83) will judge:
Flatline vs. Tesco(black)lotus
void_nothing vs. soramaro
Fair Judge Moss_Elemental will judge:
StonerOfKruphix vs. Vertain
Flatline vs. Tesco(black)lotus
Fair Judge Blydden will judge:
void_nothing vs. soramaro
Flintlock vs. Necarg
Fair Judge Indighost will judge:
Flintlock vs. Necarg
StonerOfKruphix vs. Vertain
Because of what happened, the Consulate also established a new Judging Deadline: Thursday, October 27th 23:59 EDT. Now let's make some victims... ehm, let's go to work, judges!
Judgments complete, not final until deadline.
Design
(2.5/3) Appeal - Timmy doesn't care. Johnny could use this for protection, but it's Spike who loves this card. Flexible mass destruction is one of the things he likes the most.
(3/3) Elegance - All good.
Development
(3/3) Viability - No problems with the color pie: if Ratchet Bomb can exist, this can too. Rarity feels right.
(3/3) Balance - Playable in limited I guess, but constructed is where this can shine as you can build your deck around it. I can definitely see this in Standard, it could maybe also see a little play in older formats but not as much as to be oppressive I think. I don't see big problems in casual or multiplayer.
Creativity
(1/3) Uniqueness - This is just an energy version of Ratchet Bomb, nothing more. It also heavily reminds me of Engineered Explosives. Both of these are famous cards.
(2.5/3) Flavor - Both name and flavor text feel a bit generic to me, but they definitely work, as does the whole concept.
Polish
(3/3) Quality - All good.
(2/2) Main Challenge - Good.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 22/25
Design
(2.5/3) Appeal - Timmy doesn't care. Johnny likes this for digging his library for combo pieces, and this card does this quite well, and very well in a dedicated energy deck. Spike likes this for card advantage.
(2/3) Elegance - A bit on the wordy side, but as short as it can be for what it does. The "if it's untapped" part is also a bit unelegant.
Development
(3/3) Viability - No problems with the color pie and rarity looks appropriate.
(2/3) Balance - I'm not sure I'd play this in limited, it's potential card advantage but it doesn't affect the board in any way by itself. In constructed it looks much more playable, casual for sure, maybe competitive too if it proves reliable enough in providing card advantage. I see no problems in multiplayer. I'm honestly not sure the "if it's untapped" part is needed for balance. I'd like this card much more without it and I don't think that would cause problems.
Creativity
(3/3) Uniqueness - Even without energy, I can't remember any existing card working in a similar way, even if I feel like there must be some.
(2/3) Flavor - Both name and flavor text feel a bit too generic to me, but they still work well enough, as does the whole concept.
Polish
(2.5/3) Quality - "X amount" is wrong, it should either be "Pay X E" or be "Pay any amount of E" and then say "where X is the amount of E paid this way" (-0.5).
(2/2) Main Challenge - Good.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 21/25
Design
(2.5/3) Appeal - Timmy likes giving additional bonuses to his creatures but I don't really see this card exciting him fully. Johnny likes this as a constant source of energy counters that he can do things with, even though I don't think these are the rewards he's looking for. Spike really likes this for its efficiency and versatility, and also the fact that you can equip this without spending mana.
(2/3) Elegance - The first sentence is perfectly functional but a bit hard to read. The card as a whole is also quite wordy.
Development
(3/3) Viability - No problems with the color pie and rarity looks appropriate.
(2.5/3) Balance - This is certainly playable in limited, and in Standard too I think. Getting energy out of the first ability is very easy and the rewards are quite tempting. I'm glad this costs three mana to equip because of this, but I have to admit the alternative energy-only equip cost scares me a little. I'd want to test that part throughly if I were a real developer. Maybe it turns out it's fine in the end, but there is potential for danger anywhere you provide mana-free alternative costs. I see no problems in casual or multiplayer.
Creativity
(2/3) Uniqueness - This vaguely reminds me of Umezawa's Jitte in a sense, and it's also basically an Equipment version of Multiform Wonder. It has its own identity but it has clear inspirations.
(1.5/3) Flavor - The name is fine. No room for flavor text.
Polish
(1.5/3) Quality - In the equip cost, there should be no spaces before and after the dash (that should be long but I'm ignoring it because of the non-Latin characters restriction), as cards like Nightmare Lash and Sigil of Distinction show us (-0.5). Also, no need to capitalize "Pay" there (-0.5). Finally, the order of keywords should be "first strike, vigilance, trample", as seen on multiple cards. The closest example is Sword of Vengeance (-0.5).
(2/2) Main Challenge - Good.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 19/25
Design
(2/3) Appeal - This is a pure Johnny card. Johnny absolutely loves this card, there is so much he can do with this. Timmy and Spike don't care.
(2.5/3) Elegance - You cannot return the card you exile to pay the activated ability's cost, and I can see this being a little confusing to some less experienced players. It's not necessary for function, but adding the word "another" might have helped here.
Development
(3/3) Viability - Reanimating artifacts is usually white, but I see no problems with allowing other colors to do it, especially in an artifact block like Kaladesh. It's not like it undermines any color's weakness. Rarity feels right.
(2/3) Balance - This cannot generate any loop because of the exile cost, and that's good. This could be playable in limited, but the facts that it doesn't affect the board by itself and that you're not getting card advantage until the second reanimated artifact don't help. In Standard, this could see some play in artifact decks or if some combo exploiting it is found. I can't see this in older formats, I thought about Modern Affinity, but I think this costs too much for that deck. I see no big problem in casual or multiplayer. The big problem would have been eventual loops, but you smartly avoided it.
Creativity
(3/3) Uniqueness - Even without energy, I can't remember any existing card working in a similar way, even if I feel like there must be some.
(2.5/3) Flavor - The name is fine, even though the word "engine" is a bit generic when it comes to artifacts. A lot of artifacts could be flavored as engines. What I like the most about the flavor of this card is how much the flavor text and the mechanics make sense with each other.
Polish
(0/3) Quality - It's been years by noy that the "in-play zone" is called the "battlefield": "…is put into a graveyard from the battlefield" (-1). In the reminder text, it should be "an energy counter", not "one" (-0.5). The cost "Exile an artifact…" should be capitalized (-0.5). In the graveyard there are no "artifacts" but "artifact cards": "return target artifact card..." (-0.5). In the flavor text, the attribution should be in its own line (-0.5).
(2/2) Main Challenge - Good.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 19/25
Flatline: 22
Tesco(black)lotus: 21
void_nothing: 19
soramaro: 19
MCC - Winner (6): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019 || Host (15): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here) || Judge (34): every month from Nov 2014 to Nov 2016 except Oct 2015, every month from Feb to Jul 2017 except Apr 2017, then Oct 2017, May Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here)
CCL - Winner (3): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last one here) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016
DCC - Winner (1): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar) || Host (3): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016
• The two public custom sets I've been part a part of the design team for:
"Brotherhood of Ormos" - Blog post with all info - set thread - design skeleton / card list || "Extinctia: Homo Evanuit" - Blog post with all info - set thread - card list spreadsheet
• "The Lion's Lair", my article series about MTG and custom card design in particular. Latest article here. Here is the article index. Rather outdated by now, and based on the old MCC rubric, but I'm leaving this here for anybody that might be interested anyway.
• My only public attempt at being a writer: the story of my Leonin custom planeswalker Jeff Lionheart. (I have a very big one that I'm working on right now but that's private for now, and I don't know if I will ever actually publish it, and I also have ideas for multiple future ones, including one where I'm going to reprise Jeff.)
(2/3) Appeal: Spike likes this. Johnny sees combo potential.
(3/3) Elegance: No problems here.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: No problems here.
(1/3) Balance: This card would be sick in a mill deck. Glimpse the Unthinkable alone would get you
Creativity -
(2/3) Uniqueness: The first part is new, as is getting any permanent card from an opponent's graveyard.
(3/3) Flavor: No problems here.
Polish -
(1/3) Quality: The firs line should read “Whenever a card is put into a graveyard from anywhere, you get E.” It should also be “... the amount of E paid this way.” Also, I read your post about the card name. Next time, do a last minute check.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met.
Total: 19/25
(1.5/3) Appeal: Johnny might find a combo. Spike might play with this.
(3/3) Elegance: No problems here.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: No problems here.
(2/3) Balance: I think the cost of the activated ability should include t, since there are several ways to get E, and it would build up faster in a multiplayer game.
Creativity -
(2/3) Uniqueness: Nothing here that hasn't been done before.
(3/3) Flavor: No problems here.
Polish -
(2.5/3) Quality: “If” should be capitalized.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met
Total: 21/25
(3/3) Appeal: Timmy likes the mass destruction. Johnny could find a way to ramp up the E collecting. Spike just likes it.
(3/3) Elegance: No problems here.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: No problems here.
(2/3) Balance: Fabrication Module has you paying four mana to get one E. Since it's rare, maybe it could cost less, but it definitely should cost more than just t.
Creativity -
(1/3) Uniqueness: This is too similar to Ratchet Bomb, but I wouldn't be surprised if this was printed.
(3/3) Flavor: No problems here.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: No problems here.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met.
Total: 22/25
(1/3) Appeal: Spike might like it.
(3/3) Elegance: No problems here.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: No problems here.
(2/3) Balance: The first ability checks if it's untapped. The last ability can be activated at any time. If you wanted the first ability to be effective, the last ability should only be activated during your turn.
Creativity -
(2/3) Uniqueness: Reminds me a little bit of Bane Alley Broker.
(3/3) Flavor: No problems here.
Polish -
(1/3) Quality: I think the second ability should read “Pay any amount of E.” Also, the last ability should read “Return target card exiled with ~ to its owner's hand.” See Bane Alley Broker
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met
Total: 20/25
I think I'll say this is NOT final, but I might not have time to revise this as I'll be busy tomorrow.
Design
(2/3) Appeal: Timmy and Johnny alike delight at this quixotic piece. Allowing for exponential boosts of energy and dudes of increasing size! However at six mana, this creation is a touch to expensive for Spike. For him, a six-drop needs to do something NOW. Maybe an energy heavy deck would appreciate this, but the fact that it only boosts NON-creature artifacts lends itself to durdly plays and lots of similarly do-nothing artifacts.
(2/3) Elegance: The energy gain clause took me a second look, before I realized how it worked, and that it counted itself. The one real problem is that the +1/+1 counters stay on the animation target, but said animation only lasts until end of turn. Creating this odd case where there are cards with +1/+1 counters but aren't creatures or even have ways to self-animate. And it doesn't really mesh with Vehicles the way you'd think, being effectively a 4/4 that turn instead of their printed stats.
Development
(3/3) Viability: Bringing themselves and others to life is common ground for artifacts, so no complaints there. Being rare is good too, as the shear quantity of energy it can produce is to be avoided at lower rarities.
(2/3) Balance: Nothing seems busted here, but the distribution of power seems wonky. Compared to the produced energy, the cost for a temporary 4/4, that maybe becomes an 8/8 seems really high here. I know you're supposed to have energy before hand, but needing SIX artifacts and a full turn to get one dude seems underwhelming.
Creativity
(2/3) Uniqueness: The only artifact card that animated other artifacts that comes to mind is Karn, Silver Golem. So there's that. Still, the overall premises feels well-tread, and not terrible innovative.
(2.5/3) Flavor: The name and the flavor text of this card are cohesive. HOWEVER, the "self replicating" part seems absent. It brings to mind exponential growth and an overwhelming rush of machinery, but this card neither clones itself, nor maintains a standing force of bots.
Polish
(3/3) Quality: No infractions found.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met
(2/2) Sub Challenges: Both met.
FINAL VERDICT - {21.5/25}
Design
(2/3) Appeal: The value of this card is ingrained in the concept of slow, but inevitable progression towards an end. Repeated actions, and gradual erosion are the themes of the day. Timmy has no time for this stuff. He want's stuff NOW and this will not do. Thankfully both Johnny and Spike would be more appreciative of this concoctions wondrous applications and ingenuity.
(3/3) Elegance: Comes in: do thing "A". Pay and sacrifice: do thing "A" again. Recur and repeat. Simple and effective.
Development
(3/3) Viability: Artifacts can both hurt, and recur themselves, so no problems there. Combining those things do require higher rarities, but for what you get of this I think rare is fine.
(2.5/3) Balance: Recurring face-shocks are a dangerous thing, especially in any color. So I am glad you put a limiter on this thing, by making it not quite perpetual, and requiring an outside energy source to recur it.
Creativity
(2.5/3) Uniqueness: Ok, this isn't exactly groundbreaking stuff here, but the combination of the two abilities makes things a little interesting. This is comparable to any number of pinger artifacts, but I love this for it simply not going away ever, unless outright exiled.
(3/3) Flavor: YES. I personally love the concept of Mobius Strips and Klien bottles, and their inherent infinite-ness. So a card with a card with a self recursion ability, a fitting name, an in-universe setting, AND a simple but synergistic flavour text hits the sweet spot of Vorthosian goodness.
Polish
(3/3) Quality: No discrepancies found.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met
(2/2) Sub Challenges: Both met.
FINAL VERDICT - {23/25}
Design
(3/3) Appeal: Timmy: Lets rez big creatures! Johnny: Lets get destroyed combo pieces? Maybe self-mill and rez costly things? Spike: Reanimate all the bombs.
(2.5/3) Elegance: Wordy, yes, but necessarily wordy, and at mythic understandably wordy.
Development
(2/3) Viability: Artifacts pulling things from the graveyard is usually limited to equipment or just getting other artifacts. This seems to be stepping out of bounds. Rarity-wise a repeatable rez engine deserves a mythic slot.
(2/3) Balance: The fact that this card can get energy off of anything hitting the graveyard from anywhere is worrisome. It means milling and discard and just casting instants and sorceries nets you energy. This is especially troubling with self-mill, because it gets targets in your bin and gets you energy. This seems a little on the cheap side for that sort of thing.
Creativity
(2.5/3) Uniqueness: A literal reanimation engine is a wondrous thing to behold, and no other artifact to my knowledge does this. I've already mentioned how this may be a bad thing though.
(2/3) Flavor: Being called a module, seems to imply it would fit with the other three Module cards. Which it doesn't. You could have called it an "engine" or "matrix" or any other synonym for machine and it would have worked just as well.
Polish
(2/3) Quality: "Gain" should be "Get" in "You gain E."
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met
(2/2) Sub Challenges: Both met.
FINAL VERDICT - {20/25}
Design
(1/3) Appeal: Who is this for again? It seems to be its own nonbo. Eating the cards it intends to recur? Yes, you can choose not to exile your own cards, but that seems too slow. Also, to the top of your library rather than to hand? Maybe there's some Johnny shenanigans to be had with miracles?
(3/3) Elegance: "The each-turn" trigger seems straight forward enough. The recursion ability, while underwhelming, is not confusing.
Development
(3/3) Viability: Since its a colored artifact, and in the colors of recursion, the color wheel is appeased. Rarity is also fine.
(1.5/3) Balance: Rather hard to say, but largely this leaves a far deal to be desired. Mostly its the fact that the recursion replaces your own draw and therefore isn't really card advantage. But there is also the problem that most cards that allow recursion of themselves, exile on resolution. This seems somehow, both boring and dangerous.
Creativity
(1.5/3) Uniqueness: Green and black know recursion like the back of their hands, so nothing new there. On a body? Eternal Witness says hello. Now continuous recursion? Hmm, interesting.
(2/3) Flavor: Um, Gonti isn't green last I checked. Yes, this is something he might employ, but that still seems odd to me.
Polish
(3/3) Quality: No discrepancies found.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met
(2/2) Sub Challenges: Both met.
FINAL VERDICT - {19/25}
void_nothing VERSUS soramaro
(2/3) Appeal: Timmy particularly likes equipment, but to say that he would be particularly appealed by this card is a stretch. Johnny likes energy engines that are also versatile, but this card does not necessarily appeal to him either. No, this card more appeals to Spike; she can make great use of this card’s versatility.
(2/3) Elegance: This card is rather wordy for what it is trying to do, and it also does a lot of things all in rules text box, which also feels a little unnecessary.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: Appropriately colorless and appropriately rare.
(3/3) Balance: This card is well-balanced. It looks intimidating at first until one realizes that it is very average with only its own energy, yet this card is also quite great with more sources of energy, just like all of the other energy cards. This card is well done in that sense.
Creativity -
(3/3) Uniqueness: An equipment that costs energy to equip feels like low-hanging fruit in terms of creativity, but since Wizards of the Coast has not printed any such artifact as of yet, here is your perfect score.
(3/3) Flavor: Even without flavor text (which would not fit on the card if it were to see print anyway), this card is wonderfully flavorful for my inner Vorthos as-is. The flavor and mechanics work very well together here.
Polish -
(1.5/3) Quality: For the third line of rules text, the keywords should be in the order of ‘first strike, vigilance, and trample’ (minus half a point).
In the fourth line of rules text, the dash [which should be a long dash ‘–‘] should not have spaces to either the left nor the right of it (minus half a point). Also, the word “Pay” in this very same line of rules text should not be capitalized (minus half a point).
(2/2) Main Challenge: Main challenge met!
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both subchallenges met!
Total: 21.5/25
Final thoughts: Did you know that Torch Gauntlet was originally designed to be Kaladesh’s ‘pay energy to equip’ equipment? Development changed it since it did not add anything in particular to Kaladesh as a set, yet I remain optimistic that I will see a ‘pay energy to equip’ equipment be printed someday in the future regardless.
(2/3) Appeal: Jenny loves this card; Jenny loves this card so much that saying it both appeals and excites her is still a definite understatement.
As for Tammy, this card bores her; this card has no body and does nothing particularly big at first glance. Spike would keep an eye on this card and wait to see as to whether or not Jenny could come up with any particularly powerful deck that uses this card as a key component.
(2/3) Elegance: The lack of the word ‘another’ missing from the second instance of the word “artifact” in the second line of rules text may not be a qualitative error necessarily, but it is an inelegance. All of the old and outdated rules text that this card bears here is enough to not only detract from this card’s quality score yet also from its elegance score as well.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: This card works perfectly fine as colorless. It is also appropriately at least a rare in terms of rarity.
(2/3) Balance: This card is smartly balanced on a knife’s edge. It is a card advantage engine that requires a commitment from the deck, yet it cannot create any degenerative loops by itself. Perhaps it can still be abused somehow outside of this card’s original intent, even if nothing immediately comes to mind. Just because nothing breaks this card yet does not mean that nothing could potentially do so in the future, however. Admittedly, this card is already pressurized due to clues and servos and other tokens that do also enter the graveyard from the battlefield...even if they cease to exist after state-based actions (and hence cannot fuel the second ability), it is a worrisome qualm.
Creativity -
(3/3) Uniqueness: You would think that Wizards of the Coast would have created something like this already. Yet, no, they have not.
(2/3) Flavor: The name is a little generic, and so is the flavor text. I would call the card functional but I would not call it particularly flavorful. The flavor works here but does nothing extra special in particular for my inner Vorthos.
Polish -
(0/3) Quality: For the first line of rules text: “from play” should instead be ‘from the battlefield’ (minus one point). The word “one” in the energy counter reminder text should also instead be ‘an’ (minus half a point).
For the second line of rules text: the word “exile” should be capitalized (minus half a point). The word ‘card’ is missing between the second instance of the word “artifact” and “from” (minus half a point).
For the flavor text: the name [plus title] of the individual credited with the quotation of flavor text requires its own line (minus half a point). There should also be no space between the dash [which should be a long dash ‘–‘] and the name (minus half a point).
(2/2) Main Challenge: Main challenge met!
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both subchallenges met!
Total: 18/25
Final thoughts: What if I fix it up with a lot of scrap? Will it live even longer?
Flintlock VERSUS Necarg
(2/3) Appeal: Timmy likes cards like this that do a lot. Johnny also likes cards that can generate tons of energy and can also use those tons of energy just as well.
On the other hand, Spike finds this card to be disappointingly lacking for six mana at a rarity of rare.
(2/3) Elegance: Firstly, this card counts itself in its first line of rules text, and since that is so easily missed upon a first reading, I have to count it as an inelegance. Secondly, this card does not intuitively work with vehicles like it perhaps should (they actually become 4/4s until end of turn).
Development -
(3/3) Viability: This card works quite fine as a colorless artifact. Similarly, this card also is suitable at a rarity of rare.
(2/3) Balance: This card is a little underpowered for six mana as a rare. At five mana, I would be more inclined to give this card a perfect balance score. This card does generate a lot of energy and a lot of +1/+1 counters, but this card by itself does a lot less on average, even with a lot of energy already stockpiled.
Creativity -
(2.5/3) Uniqueness: This card is quite unique. Only one other card immediately comes to mind like this one, which is Karn, Silver Golem.
(2/3) Flavor: This card is rather flavorful (aside from the name, which is a little generic), but the flavor of this card as a whole is contradictory with itself. How exactly does it do anything that I could call ‘replication’?
Polish -
(2.5/3) Quality: My fellow judge Indighost missed this, but “non-creature” does not require a hyphen (minus half a point, see Monastery Swiftspear, Metalwork Colossus, et cetera).
(2/2) Main Challenge: Main challenge met!
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both subchallenges met!
Total: 20/25
Final thoughts: I wish that this card had been decidedly pushed instead of pulled. Four +1/+1 counters on an artifact creature or a vehicle or a non-Vehicle noncreature artifact that becomes a 0/0 creature for six energy is an exciting concept.
(2/3) Appeal: Timmy is very bored by this small card. Both Johnny and Spike on the other hand each appreciate this card’s usefulness in both generating energy and an eventual win condition. It is potentially worth building around for Johnny and serves as another nice energy incentive for Spike.
(3/3) Elegance: No inelegances here.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: This card can exist as a colorless card without much of a question at all.
All five of the puzzleknots were originally printed at common, but thank goodness this has been printed at rare instead.
(2/3) Balance: Thank goodness this card does not repeat ad infinitum without outside sources of energy. This card requires a total of 30 generic mana and EEEE (four energy counters) before it can win the game under normal circumstances. This of course can be more or less in either a Two-Headed Giant, Commander, or other alternate game mode. Anyway, this is fast enough to attempt to build around yet slow enough that it will not break anything in particular. The only issue that I truly have with this card is a lack of counter play other than the usual tactic of being rushed down. Typical artifact removal nor typical counter spells work since this card can just be returned to hand once more with enough energy. Specific sideboard cards would be closer to what would be required to play against this specific card.
Creativity -
(2/3) Uniqueness: The puzzleknot cycle is already complete, but this addition is a welcome one regardless. These effects have each been done before, but by putting them together something comparatively unique has been found.
(3/3) Flavor: There is nothing here that I do not find flavorful as a Vorthos. Bravo!
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Perfect!
(2/2) Main Challenge: Main challenge met!
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both subchallenges met!
Total: 22/25
Final thought: I kind of wish that there had been an official colorless puzzleknot in Kaladesh right about now.
soramaro – 18
Necarg – 22
Flintlock – 20
Flatline: 22 + 22 = 44
Tesco(black)lotus: 21 + 20 = 41
StonerOfKruphix: 19 + 20 = 39
Vertain: 21 + 19 = 40
void_nothing: 21.5 + 19 = 40.5
soramaro: 18 + 19 = 37
Flintlock: 21.5 + 20 = 41.5
Necarg: 23 + 22 = 45
The final round is coming in a few minutes.
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.)