MTG Salvation

Appeal
0/3: The card appeals to no player group. The card is unlikely to be enjoyed by a large amount of players.
1/3: The card appeals slightly to several demographics, or appeals moderately to one demographic. A card that deserves a 1/3 would either be enjoyed marginally by most players, or enjoyed to a good degree by at least one demographic.
2/3: The card has good appeal to every player, or appeals largely to one demographic. If a card would be enjoyed by most of the playerbase, or would be enjoyed by at least one psychographic to a large degree, then it deserves a 2/3.
3/3: The card has strong appeal for each demographic, or is the type of card that would be an "absolute favorite" or a large hit for one or more demographics. This card would be wildly popular amongst players and would likely to be worth a good amount of money if it were of a higher rarity.

Elegance
0/3: The card is completely clunky, worded poorly or in a confusing manner, and has large amounts of text. The flavor seems to make no sense when compared to the mechanics, and the card leaves the player confused as to what is does and why it does that.
1/3: The card has some errors when it comes to readability, such as being excessively wordy, at least moderately confusing when interpreting function and/or flavor, or being generally confusing.
2/3: The card is mostly clean, with few errors that detract from the card's "flow". It's simple enough to read, and the mechanics make sense when lined up with the flavor.
3/3: The card is beautiful to read. The mechanics sync up perfectly with the flavor, and the text is succinct enough that the first read-through gives the player a good idea of what the card does.

Viability
0/3: The card breaks multiple rules of the game, or breaks one in an especially egregious manner. The card could be completely out of color pie, break contemporary design philosophy, be at the wrong rarity for effect, complexity, and power level, or more. If a card does something that really should not be done by that type of card, give it a 0/3.
1/3: The card breaks at least one major rule or several minor rules of the game. The card may not be at the right rarity, color, or power level with respect to color and rarity. It might give an effect that is frowned upon at a lower mana cost (instant-speed hand discard, land destruction, etc), and generally is inappropiate at its given mana cost and rarity.
2/3: The card mostly fits its given rarity and mana costs. Perhaps it gives a color access to an effect at too cheap of a rate (such as red flying or black burn), but it does not stray too far from the color pie and the current state of power level.
3/3: Every effect given is perfectly reasonable for its colors and rarity. Every effect is in color pie, and is not too complex or powerful for its rarity.

Balance
0/3: The card has an unacceptably high or egregiously low power level. Cards that fall into this category would be far too strong for their respective formats, and would completely dominate them and potentially have to be banned. Cards that would be guranteed to see zero play, be it constructed, limited, or casual, would also fall into this category.
1/3: The card breaks several rules, and would likely be too strong for its respective format. While not egregious to the point where it would be considered for banning, it would generally be the dominant deck in its format and would push other strategies out of said format. Cards with low enough power level that they would be very late picks in draft and would seldom make the cut also fall into this category.
2/3: The card is pushed, but not completely unreasonable. Cards that do their task efficiently or at a slightly reduced mana cost, but not so efficiently that other options are simply inferior, fall into this category. Cards that are niche in draft that only sometimes make it into a narrow selection of draft archetypes would also fall into this category.
3/3: The card falls into an acceptable range of power level, where it will see a good amount of play without being too dominant or straying too far from its niche. Players will want to play this card, and it will be effective, but not overwhelming.

Uniqueness
0/3: The card's effect is completely unoriginal, or is only a slight variant of an existing card.
1/3: The card has a part to it that is unique, such as a combination of keywords that has never been seen before, but is otherwise unimaginative.
2/3: The card does some things new, and presents effects that are unique that the player is unlikely to have seen before. The card doesn't do anything especially new, but presents a new twist to something old.
3/3: The card is completely creative and has never been done before. Everything about the card is unique and players will be eager to see how this newness plays out.

Flavor
0/3: The card has no flavor text despite there being room, and the name is unimaginative. The mechanics do not sync up with the flavor, and overall there is little creative coherence.
1/3: The name is simply mediocre, and the flavor text is either nonextant or paucious. The flavor is unlikely to make a lot of sense with the mechanics, and the overall effect is unimpressive.
2/3: The flavor text is good, and the name matches up well with the rest of the card. The mechanics make sense from a flavor perspective, and the card has a good amount of coherency.
3/3: The flavor text is very strong, and gives the player a strong sense of the card's flavor. The mechanics tie together well into the flavor and there is an overall sense of quality throughout the flavor areas.

Quote from Tilwin »

Timmy doesn't necessarily like only big creatures. Timmy plays for the experience and loves exciting cards which can lead to exciting plays. Planeswalkers do that, and Nefarion allows for quite some exciting interactions - bring flashy threats onto the battlefield from the graveyard (Timmy loves reanimation) and makes your threats even beefier and scarier (indestructible and +2/+0). Besides, Timmy loves Commander as a format, so the idea of a commander planeswalker should be right on his alley.
As for Johnny, it is debatable indeed whether Nefarion fully fits Johnny's agenda, but the -2 allows him to bring back threats or setup ETB effects - you can bring the creature back, then Cloudshift it to keep it onto the battlefield as yours for instance - interesting things that Johnny can already do with Whip of Erebos for instance.

I can see this card appealing to johnny; it just didn't initially feel that the focus of the card was on the -2. While your arguments for this card being a Timmy card aren't wrong, the fact that every entry this round is going to innately have some appeal to Timmy as EDH cards makes me up the scales somewhat on whether or not it's flashy enough for him. Yes, as a planeswalker the card has the potential to do that, but I feel like the effects aren't making him jump out of his seat. However, the combination of marginal appeal to both Johnny and Timmy should probably be cause for an increase in score.

Quote from Tilwin »

I don't see how this is relevant in viability. Red and black are known for generating colored mana out of thin air, cards including Pyretic Ritual, Dark Petition and Mardu Warshrieker.

I felt as though mana production is no longer in black's slice of the pie (and it's never been in white's), but you are correct about Dark Petition. Perhaps that card marks the onset of the return of Dark Ritual? Regardless, I think that with Petition this ability feels decently black enough to make it viable in Mardu.

Quote from Tilwin »

The only truly wordy ability for a planeswalker is the second ability. Would you say that Jace Architect of Thought is worth a 0 on elegance because it is wordy?

Perhaps not, but you have to remember that your planeswalker has one more ability than Jace, and consequently has much less space for the text because of the fourth ability. Your font size was very small, which is never a good sign for elegance. I apologize for not elaborating on this.

Quote from Tilwin »

Except you can also remove an opponent's blocker. This level of flexibility leads to a lot of political games in multiplayer, which after all was the target of these cards - Commander.

You are correct again (even though I noted the utility of using it on your opponent's creatures; hence the "swing unhindered"). My remark still stands, however, in that the ability doesn't bring enough to the table. Compare to Sarkhan Unbroken, another tri-colored planeswalker. His +1 provides a whole card and a mana of any color as a small bonus. Your effect is not quite as valuable, hence my comment.

Quote from Tilwin »

It is generally blue that removes costs. White on its own usually adds costs. I already gave arguments on the color accuracy of the ability. It may feel a bit underwhelming, but in commander games keep in mind you have multiple turns in which you can take advantage of this ability (especially when 4 players are involved for example). None of the commander planeswalkers have gamewinning ultimates. I can understand why you would see the ability as a bit underwhelming in a format where generating high amounts of mana is something rather frequent.

I should have named Ragemonger (and Edgewalker as its precursor) as examples of Dega getting cost reducers. I agree that the ability is certainly valuable, but compare them to your other examples of the planeswalker-commanders; Daretti's provides ludicrous value for the rest of the game, Freyalise's is admittedly not overpowered, but is achieved very quickly, Nahiri's closes out games quickly with an evasive creature, and both Ob Nixlis and Teferi give emblems that also win you the game. I'm not trying to diminish the value of your card; I'm just saying that when I think of ultimates for planeswalkers of at least a moderate cost, I imagine they will win me the game.

Quote from Tilwin »

Can you please elaborate on this? I don't see how it is confusing.

Yuuva

I'm sorry; again, I should have put more effort into my judgments. The title (coercive envoy) didn't feel like it explained the flavor well; something like "Envoy of the Damned" would have worked better in my opinion. However, your flavor isn't as bad now that I've gone back to it.

Quote from Tilwin »

Haste in primary in red, secondary in black, tertiary in green. The last ability features graveyard retrieval of creatures, which black can do, while red has also been seen doing this (via cards such as Magma Phoenix for instance).

That's fair. The mana cost reflects that the card is more white than black/red, which I should have accounted for.

Quote from Tilwin »

And you've subtracted a significant amount of points for this in Elegance already.

I meant that because the card has so many functions, playing against a card that offers so many options and timings is going to make it very difficult to play against optimally. But perhaps that is not a blow against balance.

Quote from Tilwin »

The card is admittedly flexible. It can be played in either control or midrange decks, and you can notice that the way you play it in different decks leads to different plays. That suggests versatility rather than overpower at the level of the card. IF you choose to wait to cast the angel for its silence effect, you lose the advantage of attacking with it. If you put it on the board and swing with it, you may miss a better usage of the silence effect. Aggro decks could do little with such an expensive card, but that's a restriction I was aware of when I designed it.
This is also the reason why we have both haste and flash. If you play it with flash, you activate the silence on your opponent's turn, leaving them open to remove it on your turn before you can swing with it. If you cast it on your turn, you can swing with it, but you hinder only instant abilities and spells your opponents might cast. I never claimed everything is obvious on this card, but as I said, as a mythic it is allowed to feature such complexity.

Fair points.

Quote from Tilwin »

Yes and no. Triggering the silence on the cast vs. on the enter the battlefield comes with advantages and disadvantages. Because it is triggered on cast, your opponent needs to have removal or they won't be able to remove the angel the turn it enters the battlefield. But that means casting it on your turn instead of your opponent's turn (hence the haste which I reiterate is highly important in spite of the existing flash) allows you to freely swing with it in the absence of a counterspell.

The reason I belive this card needs to have an "ETB, but only if you cast from hand" restriction is that this card is too backbreaking against counterspell decks. If you flash this in during their upkeep, not only do you waste their entire turn regardless of if they have a counter for the angel, but you also, as you noted, give it protection from removal for that turn, making it too massive of a tempo swing (even at its hefty cost).

Quote from Tilwin »

Would you say Obzedat, Ghost Council is a poor choice of a subtype? Or many other advisors that in fact impact the board? Yuuva does so via the Silence effect, while at the same time being quite a significant creature on its own (hence the Angel). I would normally have no problem with someone not liking a subtype just because they don't like it, but I see quite a large penalty here to be honest not to remark it.

Storyline flavor aside, Obzedat is an advisor in the sense that it hides in the shadows and provides an incremental effect. I believe that the connotation for "advisor" is something that isn't a direct combatant, but rather provides stratety from the sidelines. If you do a gatherer search on advisors,, you'll see that few of them have abilities that pertain to combat. While the silence ability does somewhat match to this trend, I believe that a Cleric would have been a much better fit for what you're looking for. The imagery that I'm getting from this is some supreme Archangel coming down and smiting the unworthy, regardless of if their magi want to try to cast spells (that they can't, because they've been silenced). It clashes strikingly with the image of an advisor in my opinion.

Quote from Tilwin »

Once again, the Silence was never meant to trigger on ETB. I don't get why everyone expects her to synergize directly with the Silence. If you make abstraction of that ability existing on the card, you would still see it as synergistic with both commanders - and it's not something "subtle" or something "I have to explain".
Kaalia allows putting an Angel onto the battlefield - any Angel, Demon or Dragon would synergize with her, let alone a 4/3 which can come back to your hand from your graveyard and then be put onto the battlefield for free by Kaalia.
As for Nefarion, I don't see how it offers minimal synergy with Yuuva. All his abilities have synergy with her.
- The +2/+0 turns her into a 6/3 indestructible, flying, which is highly relevant.
- The -2 ability allows you to get her onto the battlefield, swing, then put her back into your hand restriction-free so you can recast her for the Silence effect.
- The ultimate reduces both her casting cost and the recursion effect quite significantly. It might not specifically target Yuuva, it can aid other big cost creatures of course, but at the end of the day it synergizes with her as well.

I probably judged this area too harshly.

Quote from Tilwin »

And that's all I had to say. I know it's not easy seeing everything on a card when you have 10 cards to judge, so I hope my remarks are seen as objective and to the point.
Thanks for the remarks and the judging, from certain perspectives it did make me see some aspects I might have missed.

Thank you for the feedback, and I appreciate your participation this month! Again, I rushed through your judgments and missed a lot of finer points, and I apologize for that, and I wish you luck as a judge next month.