You prevailed. Your little gadget proved to be more effective. All that remains of your adversary is a bit of ash. Maybe this was going a bit far, but the multiverse is a dangerous place and only the strongest will survive. The crowd is stunned. Never have they witnessed a battle this fierce and certainly not one that ended in death. Before anyone can react you vanish into thin air, returning to the anomaly. It’s time to leave a mark on history and shape the future forever...
Main Challenge: Design a card using a new phrase, which shortens rulestext that has been on a card before.
Challenge 1: Your phrase is not a Keyword ability and not an Ability word. (Keyword Actions are fine.) Challenge 2: The shortened rulestext has made an appeareance on at least 5 cards.
MC: Think "die" or "hexproof". "is put into the graveyard from the battlefield" became "die(s)". "Can't be the target of spells or abilities your opponents control." became "Hexproof". Please include an explanation what exactly the new phrase replaces. (That doesn't mean you are to explain your reasoning behind it.)
C1: http://mtg.gamepedia.com/Keyword_ability http://mtg.gamepedia.com/Ability_word http://mtg.gamepedia.com/Keyword_action
C2: Please include a link to a search or 5 specific cards in your post if you are aiming to do this.
Schedule:
May 06th - Round 1 submission deadline.
May 10th - Round 1 judgement deadline.
May 11th - Round 2 start.
May 14th - Round 2 submission deadline.
May 15th - Brackets will be set and the judges will comment on their assigned cards.
May 16th - Judge commenting deadline.
May 17th - Players get a chance to alter their cards as much as they like to adress the worries of their judge. If the judge has had a misconception about the card, it's allowed to include a note.
May 18th - Round 2 submission alteration deadline.
May 21st - Round 2 judgement deadline.
May 22nd - Original point it time to do the announcement.
May 23rd - Announcement and start of round 3.
May 24th - Round 3 end.
May 28th - Round 3 judgement deadline.
May 29th - Round 4 start
June 2nd - Round 4 end and start of judgment
June 8th - Round 4 judgement deadline.
Design - (X/3) Appeal: Do the different player psychographics (Timmy/Johnny/Spike) have a use for the card? (X/3) Elegance: Is the card easily understandable at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
Development - (X/3) Viability: How well does the card fit into the color wheel? Does it break or bend the rules of the game? Is it the appropriate rarity? (X/3) Balance: Does the card have a power level appropriate for contemporary constructed/limited environments without breaking them? Does it play well in casual and multiplayer formats? Does it create or fit into a deck/archetype? Does it create an oppressive environment?
Creativity - (X/3) Uniqueness: Has a card like this ever been printed before? Does it use new mechanics, ideas, or design space? Does it combine old ideas in a new way? Overall, does it feel “fresh”? (X/3) Flavor: Does the name seem realistic for a card? Does the flavor text sound professional? Do all the flavor elements synch together to please Vorthos players?
Polish - (X/3) Quality: Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating. (X/2) Main Challenge: Was the main challenge satisfied? Was it approached in a unique or interesting way? Does the card fit the intent of the challenge? (X/2) Subchallenges: One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
—Eli Shiffrin, Rules Manager, on a design stacking lifelink instances
Desperate Dissenter1RG
Creature - Jackal Warrior (U) 1, t, Put a -1/-1 counter on Desperate Dissenter: Desperate Dissenter assaults target creature or player (It deals damage equal to its power to target creature or player.) Having failed to find a place in the afterlife, he can at least harm someone who is still trying.
3/3
Explanation: seems like the next logical step after introducing of fighting to shorten "deals damage equal to its power to..." wording, cause we have a plenty of one-sided effects like this. See: Abyssal Hunter, Arlinn, Embraced by the Moon, Warstorm Surge, Skarrgan Skybreaker, Rabid Bite and so on. Also: this effect is more vary because it can sometimes target a player but it's not necessary.
Lorren of the Vale3WU
Legendary Creature - Human Mystic (M)
When Lorren of the Vale enters the battlefield, blink another target permanent. (Exile another target permanent. Return that card to the battlefield under its owner's control at the beginning of the next end step.)
You may cast nonland cards exiled with Lorren of the Vale as though they had flash. 1WU: Blink Lorren of the Vale.
3/4
Fadyra, Call to SerenityX3WU
Legendary Creature - Angel (M)
Flash
Flying
When Fadyra, Call to Serenity enters the battlefield, recall up to X target creatures. Then put a +1/+1 counter on Fadyra for each creature recalled this way. (Return up to X target creatures to their owner's hands.) Innistrad was given a powerful, calming voice in the wake of insanity.
4/4
And thus the final round is closed. Each judge judges each player.
Since the June MCC Round 1 submission ends on the 8th, that will also be our deadline for judging. So please finish up by then.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
—Eli Shiffrin, Rules Manager, on a design stacking lifelink instances
Desperate Dissenter1RG
Creature - Jackal Warrior (U) 1, t, Put a -1/-1 counter on Desperate Dissenter: Desperate Dissenter assaults target creature or player (It deals damage equal to its power to target creature or player.) Having failed to find a place in the afterlife, he can at least harm someone who is still trying.
3/3
Explanation: seems like the next logical step after introducing of fighting to shorten "deals damage equal to its power to..." wording, cause we have a plenty of one-sided effects like this. See: Abyssal Hunter, Arlinn, Embraced by the Moon, Warstorm Surge, Skarrgan Skybreaker, Rabid Bite and so on. Also: this effect is more vary because it can sometimes target a player but it's not necessary.
Design (2.5/3) Appeal - Timmy likes how this can affect the board, but he doesn't like that it gets smaller and smaller as you use the ability. Johnny has a very interesting challenge to solve in deckbuilding (see Balance). Spike likes this as removal, and the fact that it can go to the head is very relevant to him. (3/3) Elegance - No problems here.
Development (3/3) Viability - No problems with the color pie. Rarity looks good. (2.5/3) Balance - There is anti-synergy between the cost and the effect of the ability: the -1/-1 counter is already there when the ability resolves, so it counts for determining how much damage you deal. For example, the first time you activate this it deals 2 damage to the assaulted creature, not 3. The second time it will deal 1 damage, not 2. The third time it will deal no damage, and it will die with its own ability on the stack (provided you are fool enough to activate it the third time with no reasons and no pumping effects). Still, this is a very interesting self-balancing factor that allows the card to be uncommon. I expect this card to be very playable in limited despite what I just said, but not in constructed unless you put it in a combo that removes the -1/-1 counters or prevents them from being put there in the first place. For example, one could think of putting this in Melira Modern decks, that's until you realize that it's a nonbo because what Melira actually does is making the ability cost unpayable, and you can't activate an ability which cost you can't pay. Now, if the -1/-1 counter were part of the effect instead of a cost, it would be a completely different matter and it would work in Melira decks, but the card would definitely lose in elegance. Still, there are probably other combo decks that might play this. In the end, it just suffices to put a +1/+1 counter on this to annihilate the -1/-1 counter, and there should be plenty of ways of putting a +1/+1 counter on a single creature repeatedly, while possibly also untapping it and generate mana. Let Johnny solve this. I see no problems in casual. In multiplayer, you have the option to assault multiple opponents (and their creatures of course), and the choice of which opponent to assault first looks very interesting and political, for those players who like political aspects in their Magic (not me, but there are).
Creativity (0.5/3) Uniqueness - This is similar to a lot of existing cards and one-sided fight is something we've already seen in many occasions, as you mention yourself. The card doesn't even stand out for being splashy, it just feels an ordinary card. I doubt you would remember this card after some time its set has been released. New keyword is new, but that was requested by the main challenge. (3/3) Flavor - Both the name and the flavor text are very good, and the overall concept makes complete sense in the world of Amonkhet.
Polish (2.5/3) Quality - In the reminder text, you should not repeat "target". It should be "to that creature or player" (-0.5). Detain is the first example of this that comes to my mind (see Azorius Arrester), but I'm sure there are more. (2/2) Main Challenge - Good. (2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 21/25
Angelic Arrester1WWUU
Creature — Angel (M)
Flying
When Angelic Arrester enters the battlefield, creatures can't be blocked this turn.
Whenever a creature you control deals combat damage to a player, you may restrain target creature. (Tap that creature. It doesn't untap during its controller's next untap step.) Awestruck criminals are easier to catch.
3/5
Explanation: I decided to turn the classic "freeze" effect template ("Tap target creature. It doesn't untap during its controller's next untap step.") into Restrain. This effect was seen on many cards, such as Sleep, Crippling Chill, Decision Paralysis and many others, and, while I usually call this effect "freeze", I decided to give it a more open-ended name since technically any color can restrain a creature by one mean or the other, and this being more of a WU effect, it didn't really make sense for White to "freeze" something.
Design (2.5/3) Appeal - Timmy definitely likes this. The restrain ability triggering from every creature and not just this makes this card much more open-ended, and Johnny likes that. He still needs to connect though, and he might prefere something less dependent on combat. Spike likes this as a finisher. (2.5/3) Elegance - A bit wordy, but otherwise fine.
Development (2/3) Viability - This could just be monoblue for its abilities. The only thing requiring white here is the Angel creature type, but the card could very easily be reworked as a blue creature type (for example, just make this a Sphinx with the same rules text). At least, flying is white too and white is secondary at freezing, whatever you call it, so this can still be white. It just doesn't have to, and monoblue would make this more elegant and easier to cast. Rarity is fine. (3/3) Balance - This is a limited bomb and it's very probably Standard playable, if you can reliably pay the very restrictive mana cost. I can't see it in bigger formats though (not necessarily a problem). I see no problems in casual. In multiplayer, the fact that this does not say "restrain target creature defending player controls" is very interesting. You can hit one player and restrain a creature another opponent controls, or even one of yours (and Johnny might appreciate that).
Creativity (1/3) Uniqueness - The new keyword was required by the main challenge. Outside of that, there is nothing new here. At least there is a bit of splashiness that might help this getting remembered in the future, but it may very easily be one of those mythics that you just forget once it rotates out of Standard. (3/3) Flavor - The name is fine, but the flavor text is wonderful in my opinion. It manages to tell a story in a single line of text: the angel comes down right in front of the criminals, and their awe in seeing her gives her the time to arrest them. Very good!
Polish (3/3) Quality - All good. (2/2) Main Challenge - Good. (2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 21/25
Lorren of the Vale3WU
Legendary Creature - Human Mystic (M)
When Lorren of the Vale enters the battlefield, blink another target permanent. (Exile another target permanent. Return that card to the battlefield under its owner's control at the beginning of the next end step.)
You may cast nonland cards exiled with Lorren of the Vale as though they had flash. 1WU: Blink Lorren of the Vale.
3/4
Design (3/3) Appeal - Timmy likes how this can affect the board. Johnny and Spike can both do a lot of things with blinking: the former can exploit various synergies, while the latter can reuse ETB effects for value. (1/3) Elegance - You need to focus a bit to understand that the static ability is actually meant to let you steal opposing permanents: when this enters target an opposing permanent with the ETB trigger, play it as an instant, then for three mana blink this, it will come back at end of turn and let you do it again. I had to think about it for a few moments to see this interaction. I can only imagine a newer player taking much longer, if they get it at all before someone points it out to them or they have this played against (and that doesn't look like the most fun of experiences).
Development (3/3) Viability - No problems with the color pie. Rarity looks good. (2/3) Balance - I'm glad this is legendary to avoid potential loops where you have two copies of this targeting one another. As already mentioned, this card is very flexible because not only it lets you reuse ETB effects but it also allows you to steal your opponents' permanents with a clever interaction between the abilities. In short, you can steal two permanents (even lands, and this is hugeEdit: actually the static ability says "nonland", so you can blink a land with the triggered ability but you won't be able to steal it. That's good for balance, but it doesn't really change the point I'm about to make) from your opponents (different opponents too, and this is relevant in multiplayer) for eight mana total. Considering that today's standard is Mind Control costing you five mana to steal one creature or Confiscate/Volition Reins costing you six for any permanent, eight for two permanents might be fine. The problem is that you can repeat that in the following turns, essentially stealing one permanent a turn. That's not fun from the other side of the table, regardless of the cost. It's kind of like annihilator in a way, but even worse because the permanents don't just leave the battlefield but they'll be turned against you. Annihilator already wasn't fun, that's a known fact (and why it didn't return in BFZ), so saying this can be even worse is not good. The cost can make it balanced in gameplay, but increasing the cost doesn't make it more fun for the opponent when it happens. That said, this card looks definitely playable in limited and maybe in constructed too, especially if there are advantageous ETB effects to pair this with. The "not fun from the other side" aspect is not good in casual. I've already mentioned potentially interesting implications in multiplayer.
Creativity (1.5/3) Uniqueness - The new keyword was required by the main challenge. Outside of that, the only thing giving this its own identity is the gameplay implied by the second ability. That's not bad in this regard, but it could be better. (2/3) Flavor - The name is fine. Up to a couple lines of flavor text could have fit according to MSE. Worthy of notice is the Mystic creature type, last seen on new cards in main sets back in Odyseey (there are two reprints, one in Time Spiral and one in Vintage Masters, and two cards from Portal Three Kingdoms). I like bringing back old things where they make sense.
Polish (2.5/3) Quality - In the reminder text, you should not repeat "target". It should be "Exile that permanent..." (-0.5). Detain is the first example of this that comes to my mind (see Azorius Arrester), but I'm sure there are more. (2/2) Main Challenge - Good. (2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 19/25
Fadyra, Call to SerenityX3WU
Legendary Creature - Angel (M)
Flash
Flying
When Fadyra, Call to Serenity enters the battlefield, recall up to X target creatures. Then put a +1/+1 counter on Fadyra for each creature recalled this way. (Return up to X target creatures to their owner's hands.) Innistrad was given a powerful, calming voice in the wake of insanity.
4/4
Design (3/3) Appeal - Assuming this works as intended here. Timmy likes this: a relevant creature that can get even bigger while also clearing the way. Johnny can definitely do some tricks with recall. Spike also likes this, it has a good quality/cost ratio. (1/3) Elegance - The text is not too long and easy to understand, but putting together X with a generic mana symbol like this in the mana cost is technically correct but not the most beautiful thing to look at. Also, most people will think that this works just fine when in reality it does not work as is (more on that right away), and that's confusing.
Development (0.5/3) Viability - No problems with the color pie or rarity, but this card doesn't work in the rules. The value of X is NOT passed from the mana cost to a triggered ETB ability. When the triggered ability is on the stack, this card is already on the battlefield, and an X everywhere but on the stack is zero, so zero is the value of X the trigger sees. "Recall up to zero target creatures" doesn't seem to do that much. Relevant rule:
Quote from CR (AKH Edition) »
107.3f If a card in any zone other than the stack has an {X} in its mana cost, the value of {X} is treated as 0, even if the value of X is defined somewhere within its text.
Easy solution: remove the X from the mana cost (which also helps with elegance by the way), and word the trigger as "When Fadyra, Call to Serenity enters the battlefield, you may pay X. If you do, recall up to X target creatures." Now it works. One objection could be: but Polukranos, World Eater works just fine. Again, because it's not the first time I bring this up in judgments, monstrosity X works only because it's an exception explicitly spelled out in the CR:
Quote from CR (AKH Edition) »
701.29c If a permanent's ability instructs a player to "monstrosity X," other abilities of that permanent may also refer to X. The value of X in those abilities is equal to the value of X as that permanent became monstrous.
Of course, one could apply the same rules change monstrosity had to recall too when you update the rules to introduce recall, but for now this doesn't work because there is no universal rule that makes all abilities see the value of X like monstrosity does. I'm sorry. (3/3) Balance - Again, I'm assuming the wording is changed for this to work as intended here. The costs look fine: five mana for a 4/4 with flash and flying is good, and you have to pay more mana, in a scaling quantity, to use the recall part. The fact that this can act as a one-sided Evacuation that also leaves a big creature on your side is very interesting and looks very strong, definitely worth of a mythic by the way. This is a limited bomb and I can also easily see it in Standard, probably not bigger formats because of the (necessary) relatively high cost. I see no particular problems in casual and multiplayer. Also, the fact that you can bounce ehm... recall creatures controlled by different players looks interesting in multiplayer. If printed for real, I'm sure it would take some time to call this "recall" instead of "bounce", but similar things have already happened in Magic history and will happen again for sure (we know "mill" won't be called "mill" when they eventually will have to keyword it for example).
Creativity (1.5/3) Uniqueness - The new keyword was required by the main challenge. The triggered ability is at least a bit original (I don't remember a creature getting +1/+1 counters based on the number of bounced creatures), but the single components are things we see in every set. (3/3) Flavor - Both the name and the flavor text are very good, and I also like very much the concept of "calm after the storm". Innistrad totally deserves that calm after all what happened there in both blocks set there.
Polish (1.5/3) Quality - In cases like this, where the keyword is far from its corresponding reminder text, the reminder text is given in the form "To do X, do this." So I think the reminder text here should be "(To recall a creature, return it to its owner's hand.)" that also happens to be shorter by the way (-0.5). To work, the trigger needs to be reworded as mentioned in Viability (-1 for functional mistake). (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.)
Polish -
(3/3) Quality:
(2/2) Main Challenge:
(2/2) Subchallenges:
Total: 22/25
Design -
(X/3) Appeal:
(X/3) Elegance:
Development -
(X/3) Viability:
(X/3) Balance:
Creativity -
(X/3) Uniqueness:
(X/3) Flavor:
Polish -
(3/3) Quality:
(2/2) Main Challenge:
(2/2) Subchallenges:
Total: 19/25
Design -
(X/3) Appeal:
(X/3) Elegance:
Development -
(X/3) Viability:
(X/3) Balance:
Creativity -
(X/3) Uniqueness:
(X/3) Flavor:
Polish -
(3/3) Quality:
(2/2) Main Challenge:
(2/2) Subchallenges:
Total: 20/25
Design -
(X/3) Appeal:
(X/3) Elegance:
Development -
(X/3) Viability:
(X/3) Balance:
Creativity -
(X/3) Uniqueness:
(X/3) Flavor:
Polish -
(2.5/3) Quality: Reference needs to be changed on the reminder text to clarify what Recall is actually "recalling".
(2/2) Main Challenge:
(2/2) Subchallenges:
Design - (2.5/3) Appeal: Johnny might get a kick out of buffing this creature to get more out of it. Timmy is interested for similar reasons. Spike might see a cost effective card for limited. (3/3) Elegance: There's a cool connection between the cost of the ability and the effect. It's rather simple, yet deep.
Development - (2.5/3) Viability: Uncommon is a good fit. 'Assaulting' makes a lot of sense in green and red. Needing to shorten 'deals damage equal to its power to' seems like a bit of a stretch, especially since it's and effect that doesn't show up too often and fights for space with 'fight'. However it's very intuitive and might be useful for a set that features that effect more often. (3/3) Balance: 3 mana 3/3 is fair for a two-color card. The effect isn't very strong on its own, which makes me believe this would be one of those archetype-incentive two-color uncommons that appear in every set these days. It's perfect for that.
Creativity - (2.5/3) Uniqueness:Hatchet Bully and Serrated Biskelion come close, but do not have that creative connection between cost and effect. (2/3) Flavor: Having more red/green dissenters certainly helps with Amonketh world building and I wish they'd done that. The flavortext is a bit off for me though. Someone who fails the trials isn't going to survive to carry a grudge against others. Most dissenters are more defined by a lack of faith and willingness to obey societies rules.
Polish - (3/3) Quality: Looks good. (2/2) Main Challenge: Certainly. (2/2) Subchallenges: Check and check. Abyssal Hunter is a bit old, but the recent appeareance on a common with Rabid Bite goes a great length for justifying the phrase.
Total: 22.5/25
Design - (3/3) Appeal: Mythic angels are always a hit with the playerbase. Certainly a splashy Timmy card. Spike should also be interested. (3/3) Elegance: The two effects work together real well, but are already a treat on their own. That's cool.
Development - (2.5/3) Viability: I think Mythic rare is well justified here, with it being really splashy and all. The colors are also a good fit. I don't think leaving out the "you control" for the unblockability ability for multiplayer, outweights the confusion and weird interactions it might cause in regular games. (3/3) Balance: For 5 mana this certainly packs quite the punch. But you need creatures on the field for it to do work and then it's not too hard to deal with it. For a mythic rare this might be fine.
Creativity - (2/3) Uniqueness: One-time unblockability is a rare sight in Magic actually, even though it seems obvious. Hands of Binding represents a very similar concept to your card. (1/3) Flavor: The name sounds cool and the flavortext is fair, but I have to deduct points here because I think your naming of the phrase is a big mistake. You wrote yourself that blue often uses what you now called restrain as a freezing flavor. 'Restrain' is the very opposite of open-ended, as that sounds like a very active thing someone does with someone else, preventing any kind of freeze flavor. But my biggest concern is a big missed oppurtunity, with red getting more and more access to land freezing. Like the recent Reduce to Rubble or Stensia Innkeeper. You can't actually restrain a land, but that's something that should definitely be included in the phrase. I'd have chosen 'exhaust' for this phrase.
Polish - (3/3) Quality: Looks good. (2/2) Main Challenge: Good choice. It's certainly the rulestext that I'd expect to be shortened most likely. (2/2) Subchallenges: Both met.
Total: 21.5/25
Design - (3/3) Appeal: Thematic legendaries are always welcome by the commander crowd. The card certainly has some appeal for Spike, with that potential for value. Timmy might actually like this. It's an effect of some magnitude. (2/3) Elegance: There's quite a bit to the card. Since the blink in the first line is the only way for the card to exile things, the second line sounds grander than it actually is. I feel like it would have been more elegant to combine the first and second part, but that would turn into a different template not using 'blink' obviously.
Development - (2/3) Viability: White/blue is a perfect fit. Mythic is also appropriate, messing with exile and everything. A concern I have is that turning this effect into a phrase has the trouble that they often switch things up with that kind of effect. There's also blinking that returns cards immediately, which also used very often. Turning one into a phrase and not the other seems strange. But turning both into a phrase doesn't help, because people probably wouldn't be able to tell the difference. That being said, the rulestext is rather lengthy and the blink that returns eot has more design space, so there's an argument to be made for this. (2.5/3) Balance: The card is rather costy and you need the right colors of mana to gain value big time, which wouldn't be possible in commander. Still, it's very hard to deal with as long as you have those 3 mana. Then again, it doesn't do a whole lot while just sitting on the board. Once you are able to pay the cost of the cards you exile though this becomes very opressive. Steal a permanent every turn. That's harsh.
Creativity - (2.5/3) Uniqueness: Reminscient of cards like Psychic Intrusion, but still different. Certainly an interesting idea for what to do with blinking. (2/3) Flavor: Rather generic name. Doesn't even tap into any kind of blinking magic. Something about astrality maybe? A single line of flavortext? Still, the name sounds nice in combination with that Mystic creature type. It somehow paints a picture in my mind already.
Polish - (3/3) Quality: Looks good. (2/2) Main Challenge: Check. I think keywording blinking comes up rather often as a question for MaRo and he usually explains that for the reasons I named above they decided against it, to have access to the variability. (2/2) Subchallenges: Both met. I think there's almost just as many cards that return things immediately.
Total: 21/25
Design - (3/3) Appeal: Certainly a big splashy effect, great for Timmy. Spike likes Flash creatures that already do something on entering the board. Being legendary helps with the commander crowd, especially since the card scales with mana. (2/3) Elegance: Pretty simple card on the surface. It's weird how it can bounce itself for repeated bouncing each turn. It feels like that isn't an intended function of the card, as it enters with +1/+1 counters, which don't serve any purpose in that case.
Development - (3/3) Viability: There's an argument to be made for mythic. The effect has quite the impact and feels huge. Blue/white is a good fit. (1.5/3) Balance: 5 mana 4/4 flying flash is already quite decent. Getting any number of card-free 1 mana unsommons which it is really strong. But on top of that, this enters with +1/+1 counters, which goes a bit too far for me.
Creativity - (2/3) Uniqueness: Bouncing X creatures has been done on Alexi, Zephyr Mage, even if not as efficient. Combining Flash with the possibility to return it itself makes for quite the change. (3/3) Flavor: Recall is a good name for the phrase. The name of the card sounds real nice and the flavortext makes for a cool story. I'm a bit sad she's replacing Bruna.
Polish - (2.5/3) Quality: The reminder text feels a bit disconnected from the ability it's actually referencing. I think here a mentioning of what recalling actually is would have been in order, especially since you reference it again. (2/2) Main Challenge: Check. At first I actually had an example in the clarification where I explained what I meant using 'return target creature to its owners hand', but then removed it, so it didn't feel like the players copied that. It certainly is something that's very fit to be keyworded. (2/2) Subchallenges: Check and check.
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
—Eli Shiffrin, Rules Manager, on a design stacking lifelink instances
Development
(3/3) Viability: Red/green works.
(2/3) Balance: For an uncommon, this is very strong. A 3 mana 3/3 that can turn into a Murderous Redcap at will is already strong, and the way this combos with things that remove -1/-1 counters or pump creatures is a little too good. Just think about how powerful this card is with Shed Weakness.
Creativity
(2/3) Uniqueness: It reminds me of Murderous Redcap a little too much.
(2/3) Flavor: The flavor text feels slightly off to me. I think you could have used a stronger adjective than "harm".
Polish
(2.5/3) Quality: There needs to be a space in between 1 and t after the comma. Also, it should be "deals damage equal to its power to that creature or player" in the reminder text.
(4/4) Challenges:
Total: 21.5/25
Design
(3/3) Appeal: There's something for everyone here.
(3/3) Elegance:
Development
(3/3) Viability:
(1/3) Balance: This card is completely unbeatable in limited outside of a removal spell. Let's draw a common picture. For the first four turns of the game both you and your opponent have been developing minions to the board. On your fifth turn you jam this card and attack with your three creatures. Their creatures can't block, so you get through and restrain their entire team. That's a pretty powerful turn. However, it doesn't get any better for the opponent. Your guys are going to keep attacking and keep tapping their guys down forever unless they can find a removal spell. I get that it's a very hard to cast mythic rare, but "utterly unbeatable" isn't a good place to be.
Creativity
(3/3) Uniqueness:
(3/3) Flavor: The flavor text is short but sweet. "Arrester" isn't the best title for a card, but it works so I'll let it pass.
Polish
(3/3) Quality:
(4/4) Challenges:
Total: 23/25
Design
(3/3) Appeal: There's something for everyone here.
(2/3) Elegance: There's a lot going on here. I'd have given you a lower score if it wasn't for the fact that the depth of this card far exceeds its wordiness.
Development
(3/3) Viability: I feel like black is missing from this card, as stealing the opponent's cards in this manner almost feels like a more black thing to do than a blue thing.
(2/3) Balance: I'm not a fan of how this card takes over any game it's in, and is very hard to kill, especially if you don't kill it the turn it comes down.
Creativity
(3/3) Uniqueness: Being able to cast their blinked cards is a new twist.
(2/3) Flavor: There's no real flavor to tie the card together other than "This is Lorren. He blinks and steals things."
Polish
(2.5/3) Quality: It should be "Exile that permanent." in the reminder text.
(4/4) Challenges:
Total: 21.5/25
Design
(3/3) Appeal: There's something for everyone here.
(3/3) Elegance:
Development
(3/3) Viability:
(1/3) Balance: This card is pushed a little too hard, much like how Archangel Avacyn was. Casting this card for X=0 is already very powerful, and this card leads to a savage tempo swing later on in the game. I would have made it a 3/3. Additionally, there is the fact that this card can loop itself, essentially turning into a Capsize for X4WU later on in the game unless your opponent can produce a removal spell.
Creativity
(2.5/3) Uniqueness: There's not too much new going on here.
(3/3) Flavor: This flavor text isn't my favorite among the ones you've written, but it serves the card and the mechanics work together to form a good shell.
Polish
(2.5/3) Quality: It should be "Return those creatures to their owners' hands" in the flavor text. Perhaps BraveLion's fix of "To recall a creature,..." works better than mine also.
(4/4) Challenges:
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
—Eli Shiffrin, Rules Manager, on a design stacking lifelink instances
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Art by Matt Cavotta
You prevailed. Your little gadget proved to be more effective. All that remains of your adversary is a bit of ash. Maybe this was going a bit far, but the multiverse is a dangerous place and only the strongest will survive. The crowd is stunned. Never have they witnessed a battle this fierce and certainly not one that ended in death. Before anyone can react you vanish into thin air, returning to the anomaly. It’s time to leave a mark on history and shape the future forever...
Main Challenge: Design a card using a new phrase, which shortens rulestext that has been on a card before.
Challenge 1: Your phrase is not a Keyword ability and not an Ability word. (Keyword Actions are fine.)
Challenge 2: The shortened rulestext has made an appeareance on at least 5 cards.
Please include an explanation what exactly the new phrase replaces. (That doesn't mean you are to explain your reasoning behind it.)
C1: http://mtg.gamepedia.com/Keyword_ability
http://mtg.gamepedia.com/Ability_word
http://mtg.gamepedia.com/Keyword_action
C2: Please include a link to a search or 5 specific cards in your post if you are aiming to do this.
doomfish
bravelion83
Folza
Tilwin
admirableadmiral
(4) Players:
Raptorchan
StonerOfKruphix
IcariiFA
glurman
Schedule:
May 06th - Round 1 submission deadline.
May 10th - Round 1 judgement deadline.
May 11th - Round 2 start.
May 14th - Round 2 submission deadline.
May 15th - Brackets will be set and the judges will comment on their assigned cards.
May 16th - Judge commenting deadline.
May 17th - Players get a chance to alter their cards as much as they like to adress the worries of their judge. If the judge has had a misconception about the card, it's allowed to include a note.
May 18th - Round 2 submission alteration deadline.
May 21st - Round 2 judgement deadline.
May 22nd - Original point it time to do the announcement.
May 23rd - Announcement and start of round 3.
May 24th - Round 3 end.
May 28th - Round 3 judgement deadline.
May 29th - Round 4 start
June 2nd - Round 4 end and start of judgment
June 8th - Round 4 judgement deadline.
(X/3) Appeal: Do the different player psychographics (Timmy/Johnny/Spike) have a use for the card?
(X/3) Elegance: Is the card easily understandable at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
Development -
(X/3) Viability: How well does the card fit into the color wheel? Does it break or bend the rules of the game? Is it the appropriate rarity?
(X/3) Balance: Does the card have a power level appropriate for contemporary constructed/limited environments without breaking them? Does it play well in casual and multiplayer formats? Does it create or fit into a deck/archetype? Does it create an oppressive environment?
Creativity -
(X/3) Uniqueness: Has a card like this ever been printed before? Does it use new mechanics, ideas, or design space? Does it combine old ideas in a new way? Overall, does it feel “fresh”?
(X/3) Flavor: Does the name seem realistic for a card? Does the flavor text sound professional? Do all the flavor elements synch together to please Vorthos players?
Polish -
(X/3) Quality: Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
(X/2) Main Challenge: Was the main challenge satisfied? Was it approached in a unique or interesting way? Does the card fit the intent of the challenge?
(X/2) Subchallenges: One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Total: X/25
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
—Eli Shiffrin, Rules Manager, on a design stacking lifelink instances
Creature - Jackal Warrior (U)
1, t, Put a -1/-1 counter on Desperate Dissenter: Desperate Dissenter assaults target creature or player (It deals damage equal to its power to target creature or player.)
Having failed to find a place in the afterlife, he can at least harm someone who is still trying.
3/3
Explanation: seems like the next logical step after introducing of fighting to shorten "deals damage equal to its power to..." wording, cause we have a plenty of one-sided effects like this. See: Abyssal Hunter, Arlinn, Embraced by the Moon, Warstorm Surge, Skarrgan Skybreaker, Rabid Bite and so on. Also: this effect is more vary because it can sometimes target a player but it's not necessary.
Lorren of the Vale 3WU
Legendary Creature - Human Mystic (M)
When Lorren of the Vale enters the battlefield, blink another target permanent. (Exile another target permanent. Return that card to the battlefield under its owner's control at the beginning of the next end step.)
You may cast nonland cards exiled with Lorren of the Vale as though they had flash.
1WU: Blink Lorren of the Vale.
3/4
Legendary Creature - Angel (M)
Flash
Flying
When Fadyra, Call to Serenity enters the battlefield, recall up to X target creatures. Then put a +1/+1 counter on Fadyra for each creature recalled this way. (Return up to X target creatures to their owner's hands.)
Innistrad was given a powerful, calming voice in the wake of insanity.
4/4
The text that is replaced by recall is (return... to its/their owner's hand) as seen on numerous cards but to name a few: Unsummon, Boomerang, Angelic Destiny, Blinking Spirit, and Capsize.
Since the June MCC Round 1 submission ends on the 8th, that will also be our deadline for judging. So please finish up by then.
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
—Eli Shiffrin, Rules Manager, on a design stacking lifelink instances
Desperate Dissenter 1RG
Creature - Jackal Warrior (U)
1, t, Put a -1/-1 counter on Desperate Dissenter: Desperate Dissenter assaults target creature or player (It deals damage equal to its power to target creature or player.)
Having failed to find a place in the afterlife, he can at least harm someone who is still trying.
3/3
Design
(2.5/3) Appeal - Timmy likes how this can affect the board, but he doesn't like that it gets smaller and smaller as you use the ability. Johnny has a very interesting challenge to solve in deckbuilding (see Balance). Spike likes this as removal, and the fact that it can go to the head is very relevant to him.
(3/3) Elegance - No problems here.
Development
(3/3) Viability - No problems with the color pie. Rarity looks good.
(2.5/3) Balance - There is anti-synergy between the cost and the effect of the ability: the -1/-1 counter is already there when the ability resolves, so it counts for determining how much damage you deal. For example, the first time you activate this it deals 2 damage to the assaulted creature, not 3. The second time it will deal 1 damage, not 2. The third time it will deal no damage, and it will die with its own ability on the stack (provided you are fool enough to activate it the third time with no reasons and no pumping effects). Still, this is a very interesting self-balancing factor that allows the card to be uncommon. I expect this card to be very playable in limited despite what I just said, but not in constructed unless you put it in a combo that removes the -1/-1 counters or prevents them from being put there in the first place. For example, one could think of putting this in Melira Modern decks, that's until you realize that it's a nonbo because what Melira actually does is making the ability cost unpayable, and you can't activate an ability which cost you can't pay. Now, if the -1/-1 counter were part of the effect instead of a cost, it would be a completely different matter and it would work in Melira decks, but the card would definitely lose in elegance. Still, there are probably other combo decks that might play this. In the end, it just suffices to put a +1/+1 counter on this to annihilate the -1/-1 counter, and there should be plenty of ways of putting a +1/+1 counter on a single creature repeatedly, while possibly also untapping it and generate mana. Let Johnny solve this. I see no problems in casual. In multiplayer, you have the option to assault multiple opponents (and their creatures of course), and the choice of which opponent to assault first looks very interesting and political, for those players who like political aspects in their Magic (not me, but there are).
Creativity
(0.5/3) Uniqueness - This is similar to a lot of existing cards and one-sided fight is something we've already seen in many occasions, as you mention yourself. The card doesn't even stand out for being splashy, it just feels an ordinary card. I doubt you would remember this card after some time its set has been released. New keyword is new, but that was requested by the main challenge.
(3/3) Flavor - Both the name and the flavor text are very good, and the overall concept makes complete sense in the world of Amonkhet.
Polish
(2.5/3) Quality - In the reminder text, you should not repeat "target". It should be "to that creature or player" (-0.5). Detain is the first example of this that comes to my mind (see Azorius Arrester), but I'm sure there are more.
(2/2) Main Challenge - Good.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 21/25
Angelic Arrester 1WWUU
Creature — Angel (M)
Flying
When Angelic Arrester enters the battlefield, creatures can't be blocked this turn.
Whenever a creature you control deals combat damage to a player, you may restrain target creature. (Tap that creature. It doesn't untap during its controller's next untap step.)
Awestruck criminals are easier to catch.
3/5
Design
(2.5/3) Appeal - Timmy definitely likes this. The restrain ability triggering from every creature and not just this makes this card much more open-ended, and Johnny likes that. He still needs to connect though, and he might prefere something less dependent on combat. Spike likes this as a finisher.
(2.5/3) Elegance - A bit wordy, but otherwise fine.
Development
(2/3) Viability - This could just be monoblue for its abilities. The only thing requiring white here is the Angel creature type, but the card could very easily be reworked as a blue creature type (for example, just make this a Sphinx with the same rules text). At least, flying is white too and white is secondary at freezing, whatever you call it, so this can still be white. It just doesn't have to, and monoblue would make this more elegant and easier to cast. Rarity is fine.
(3/3) Balance - This is a limited bomb and it's very probably Standard playable, if you can reliably pay the very restrictive mana cost. I can't see it in bigger formats though (not necessarily a problem). I see no problems in casual. In multiplayer, the fact that this does not say "restrain target creature defending player controls" is very interesting. You can hit one player and restrain a creature another opponent controls, or even one of yours (and Johnny might appreciate that).
Creativity
(1/3) Uniqueness - The new keyword was required by the main challenge. Outside of that, there is nothing new here. At least there is a bit of splashiness that might help this getting remembered in the future, but it may very easily be one of those mythics that you just forget once it rotates out of Standard.
(3/3) Flavor - The name is fine, but the flavor text is wonderful in my opinion. It manages to tell a story in a single line of text: the angel comes down right in front of the criminals, and their awe in seeing her gives her the time to arrest them. Very good!
Polish
(3/3) Quality - All good.
(2/2) Main Challenge - Good.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 21/25
Lorren of the Vale 3WU
Legendary Creature - Human Mystic (M)
When Lorren of the Vale enters the battlefield, blink another target permanent. (Exile another target permanent. Return that card to the battlefield under its owner's control at the beginning of the next end step.)
You may cast nonland cards exiled with Lorren of the Vale as though they had flash.
1WU: Blink Lorren of the Vale.
3/4
Design
(3/3) Appeal - Timmy likes how this can affect the board. Johnny and Spike can both do a lot of things with blinking: the former can exploit various synergies, while the latter can reuse ETB effects for value.
(1/3) Elegance - You need to focus a bit to understand that the static ability is actually meant to let you steal opposing permanents: when this enters target an opposing permanent with the ETB trigger, play it as an instant, then for three mana blink this, it will come back at end of turn and let you do it again. I had to think about it for a few moments to see this interaction. I can only imagine a newer player taking much longer, if they get it at all before someone points it out to them or they have this played against (and that doesn't look like the most fun of experiences).
Development
(3/3) Viability - No problems with the color pie. Rarity looks good.
(2/3) Balance - I'm glad this is legendary to avoid potential loops where you have two copies of this targeting one another. As already mentioned, this card is very flexible because not only it lets you reuse ETB effects but it also allows you to steal your opponents' permanents with a clever interaction between the abilities. In short, you can steal two permanents (
even lands, and this is hugeEdit: actually the static ability says "nonland", so you can blink a land with the triggered ability but you won't be able to steal it. That's good for balance, but it doesn't really change the point I'm about to make) from your opponents (different opponents too, and this is relevant in multiplayer) for eight mana total. Considering that today's standard is Mind Control costing you five mana to steal one creature or Confiscate/Volition Reins costing you six for any permanent, eight for two permanents might be fine. The problem is that you can repeat that in the following turns, essentially stealing one permanent a turn. That's not fun from the other side of the table, regardless of the cost. It's kind of like annihilator in a way, but even worse because the permanents don't just leave the battlefield but they'll be turned against you. Annihilator already wasn't fun, that's a known fact (and why it didn't return in BFZ), so saying this can be even worse is not good. The cost can make it balanced in gameplay, but increasing the cost doesn't make it more fun for the opponent when it happens. That said, this card looks definitely playable in limited and maybe in constructed too, especially if there are advantageous ETB effects to pair this with. The "not fun from the other side" aspect is not good in casual. I've already mentioned potentially interesting implications in multiplayer.Creativity
(1.5/3) Uniqueness - The new keyword was required by the main challenge. Outside of that, the only thing giving this its own identity is the gameplay implied by the second ability. That's not bad in this regard, but it could be better.
(2/3) Flavor - The name is fine. Up to a couple lines of flavor text could have fit according to MSE. Worthy of notice is the Mystic creature type, last seen on new cards in main sets back in Odyseey (there are two reprints, one in Time Spiral and one in Vintage Masters, and two cards from Portal Three Kingdoms). I like bringing back old things where they make sense.
Polish
(2.5/3) Quality - In the reminder text, you should not repeat "target". It should be "Exile that permanent..." (-0.5). Detain is the first example of this that comes to my mind (see Azorius Arrester), but I'm sure there are more.
(2/2) Main Challenge - Good.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 19/25
Fadyra, Call to Serenity X3WU
Legendary Creature - Angel (M)
Flash
Flying
When Fadyra, Call to Serenity enters the battlefield, recall up to X target creatures. Then put a +1/+1 counter on Fadyra for each creature recalled this way. (Return up to X target creatures to their owner's hands.)
Innistrad was given a powerful, calming voice in the wake of insanity.
4/4
Design
(3/3) Appeal - Assuming this works as intended here. Timmy likes this: a relevant creature that can get even bigger while also clearing the way. Johnny can definitely do some tricks with recall. Spike also likes this, it has a good quality/cost ratio.
(1/3) Elegance - The text is not too long and easy to understand, but putting together X with a generic mana symbol like this in the mana cost is technically correct but not the most beautiful thing to look at. Also, most people will think that this works just fine when in reality it does not work as is (more on that right away), and that's confusing.
Development
(0.5/3) Viability - No problems with the color pie or rarity, but this card doesn't work in the rules. The value of X is NOT passed from the mana cost to a triggered ETB ability. When the triggered ability is on the stack, this card is already on the battlefield, and an X everywhere but on the stack is zero, so zero is the value of X the trigger sees. "Recall up to zero target creatures" doesn't seem to do that much. Relevant rule: Easy solution: remove the X from the mana cost (which also helps with elegance by the way), and word the trigger as "When Fadyra, Call to Serenity enters the battlefield, you may pay X. If you do, recall up to X target creatures." Now it works. One objection could be: but Polukranos, World Eater works just fine. Again, because it's not the first time I bring this up in judgments, monstrosity X works only because it's an exception explicitly spelled out in the CR: Of course, one could apply the same rules change monstrosity had to recall too when you update the rules to introduce recall, but for now this doesn't work because there is no universal rule that makes all abilities see the value of X like monstrosity does. I'm sorry.
(3/3) Balance - Again, I'm assuming the wording is changed for this to work as intended here. The costs look fine: five mana for a 4/4 with flash and flying is good, and you have to pay more mana, in a scaling quantity, to use the recall part. The fact that this can act as a one-sided Evacuation that also leaves a big creature on your side is very interesting and looks very strong, definitely worth of a mythic by the way. This is a limited bomb and I can also easily see it in Standard, probably not bigger formats because of the (necessary) relatively high cost. I see no particular problems in casual and multiplayer. Also, the fact that you can
bounceehm... recall creatures controlled by different players looks interesting in multiplayer. If printed for real, I'm sure it would take some time to call this "recall" instead of "bounce", but similar things have already happened in Magic history and will happen again for sure (we know "mill" won't be called "mill" when they eventually will have to keyword it for example).Creativity
(1.5/3) Uniqueness - The new keyword was required by the main challenge. The triggered ability is at least a bit original (I don't remember a creature getting +1/+1 counters based on the number of bounced creatures), but the single components are things we see in every set.
(3/3) Flavor - Both the name and the flavor text are very good, and I also like very much the concept of "calm after the storm". Innistrad totally deserves that calm after all what happened there in both blocks set there.
Polish
(1.5/3) Quality - In cases like this, where the keyword is far from its corresponding reminder text, the reminder text is given in the form "To do X, do this." So I think the reminder text here should be "(To recall a creature, return it to its owner's hand.)" that also happens to be shorter by the way (-0.5). To work, the trigger needs to be reworded as mentioned in Viability (-1 for functional mistake).
(2/2) Main Challenge - Good.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 17.5/25
Raptorchan: 21
StonerOfKruphix: 21
glurman: 19
IcariiFA: 17.5
MCC - Winner (6): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019 || Host (15): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here) || Judge (34): every month from Nov 2014 to Nov 2016 except Oct 2015, every month from Feb to Jul 2017 except Apr 2017, then Oct 2017, May Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here)
CCL - Winner (3): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last one here) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016
DCC - Winner (1): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar) || Host (3): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016
• The two public custom sets I've been part a part of the design team for:
"Brotherhood of Ormos" - Blog post with all info - set thread - design skeleton / card list || "Extinctia: Homo Evanuit" - Blog post with all info - set thread - card list spreadsheet
• "The Lion's Lair", my article series about MTG and custom card design in particular. Latest article here. Here is the article index. Rather outdated by now, and based on the old MCC rubric, but I'm leaving this here for anybody that might be interested anyway.
• My only public attempt at being a writer: the story of my Leonin custom planeswalker Jeff Lionheart. (I have a very big one that I'm working on right now but that's private for now, and I don't know if I will ever actually publish it, and I also have ideas for multiple future ones, including one where I'm going to reprise Jeff.)
Design -
(X/3) Appeal:
(X/3) Elegance:
Development -
(X/3) Viability:
(X/3) Balance:
Creativity -
(X/3) Uniqueness:
(X/3) Flavor:
Polish -
(3/3) Quality:
(2/2) Main Challenge:
(2/2) Subchallenges:
Total: 22/25
Design -
(X/3) Appeal:
(X/3) Elegance:
Development -
(X/3) Viability:
(X/3) Balance:
Creativity -
(X/3) Uniqueness:
(X/3) Flavor:
Polish -
(3/3) Quality:
(2/2) Main Challenge:
(2/2) Subchallenges:
Total: 19/25
Design -
(X/3) Appeal:
(X/3) Elegance:
Development -
(X/3) Viability:
(X/3) Balance:
Creativity -
(X/3) Uniqueness:
(X/3) Flavor:
Polish -
(3/3) Quality:
(2/2) Main Challenge:
(2/2) Subchallenges:
Total: 20/25
Design -
(X/3) Appeal:
(X/3) Elegance:
Development -
(X/3) Viability:
(X/3) Balance:
Creativity -
(X/3) Uniqueness:
(X/3) Flavor:
Polish -
(2.5/3) Quality: Reference needs to be changed on the reminder text to clarify what Recall is actually "recalling".
(2/2) Main Challenge:
(2/2) Subchallenges:
Total: 18.5/25
Raptorchan: 22/25
StonerOfKruphix: 19/25
glurman: 20/25
IcariiFA: 18.5/25
(2.5/3) Appeal: Johnny might get a kick out of buffing this creature to get more out of it. Timmy is interested for similar reasons. Spike might see a cost effective card for limited.
(3/3) Elegance: There's a cool connection between the cost of the ability and the effect. It's rather simple, yet deep.
Development -
(2.5/3) Viability: Uncommon is a good fit. 'Assaulting' makes a lot of sense in green and red. Needing to shorten 'deals damage equal to its power to' seems like a bit of a stretch, especially since it's and effect that doesn't show up too often and fights for space with 'fight'. However it's very intuitive and might be useful for a set that features that effect more often.
(3/3) Balance: 3 mana 3/3 is fair for a two-color card. The effect isn't very strong on its own, which makes me believe this would be one of those archetype-incentive two-color uncommons that appear in every set these days. It's perfect for that.
Creativity -
(2.5/3) Uniqueness: Hatchet Bully and Serrated Biskelion come close, but do not have that creative connection between cost and effect.
(2/3) Flavor: Having more red/green dissenters certainly helps with Amonketh world building and I wish they'd done that. The flavortext is a bit off for me though. Someone who fails the trials isn't going to survive to carry a grudge against others. Most dissenters are more defined by a lack of faith and willingness to obey societies rules.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Looks good.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Certainly.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Check and check. Abyssal Hunter is a bit old, but the recent appeareance on a common with Rabid Bite goes a great length for justifying the phrase.
Total: 22.5/25
(3/3) Appeal: Mythic angels are always a hit with the playerbase. Certainly a splashy Timmy card. Spike should also be interested.
(3/3) Elegance: The two effects work together real well, but are already a treat on their own. That's cool.
Development -
(2.5/3) Viability: I think Mythic rare is well justified here, with it being really splashy and all. The colors are also a good fit. I don't think leaving out the "you control" for the unblockability ability for multiplayer, outweights the confusion and weird interactions it might cause in regular games.
(3/3) Balance: For 5 mana this certainly packs quite the punch. But you need creatures on the field for it to do work and then it's not too hard to deal with it. For a mythic rare this might be fine.
Creativity -
(2/3) Uniqueness: One-time unblockability is a rare sight in Magic actually, even though it seems obvious. Hands of Binding represents a very similar concept to your card.
(1/3) Flavor: The name sounds cool and the flavortext is fair, but I have to deduct points here because I think your naming of the phrase is a big mistake. You wrote yourself that blue often uses what you now called restrain as a freezing flavor. 'Restrain' is the very opposite of open-ended, as that sounds like a very active thing someone does with someone else, preventing any kind of freeze flavor. But my biggest concern is a big missed oppurtunity, with red getting more and more access to land freezing. Like the recent Reduce to Rubble or Stensia Innkeeper. You can't actually restrain a land, but that's something that should definitely be included in the phrase. I'd have chosen 'exhaust' for this phrase.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Looks good.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Good choice. It's certainly the rulestext that I'd expect to be shortened most likely.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met.
Total: 21.5/25
(3/3) Appeal: Thematic legendaries are always welcome by the commander crowd. The card certainly has some appeal for Spike, with that potential for value. Timmy might actually like this. It's an effect of some magnitude.
(2/3) Elegance: There's quite a bit to the card. Since the blink in the first line is the only way for the card to exile things, the second line sounds grander than it actually is. I feel like it would have been more elegant to combine the first and second part, but that would turn into a different template not using 'blink' obviously.
Development -
(2/3) Viability: White/blue is a perfect fit. Mythic is also appropriate, messing with exile and everything. A concern I have is that turning this effect into a phrase has the trouble that they often switch things up with that kind of effect. There's also blinking that returns cards immediately, which also used very often. Turning one into a phrase and not the other seems strange. But turning both into a phrase doesn't help, because people probably wouldn't be able to tell the difference. That being said, the rulestext is rather lengthy and the blink that returns eot has more design space, so there's an argument to be made for this.
(2.5/3) Balance: The card is rather costy and you need the right colors of mana to gain value big time, which wouldn't be possible in commander. Still, it's very hard to deal with as long as you have those 3 mana. Then again, it doesn't do a whole lot while just sitting on the board. Once you are able to pay the cost of the cards you exile though this becomes very opressive. Steal a permanent every turn. That's harsh.
Creativity -
(2.5/3) Uniqueness: Reminscient of cards like Psychic Intrusion, but still different. Certainly an interesting idea for what to do with blinking.
(2/3) Flavor: Rather generic name. Doesn't even tap into any kind of blinking magic. Something about astrality maybe? A single line of flavortext? Still, the name sounds nice in combination with that Mystic creature type. It somehow paints a picture in my mind already.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Looks good.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Check. I think keywording blinking comes up rather often as a question for MaRo and he usually explains that for the reasons I named above they decided against it, to have access to the variability.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met. I think there's almost just as many cards that return things immediately.
Total: 21/25
(3/3) Appeal: Certainly a big splashy effect, great for Timmy. Spike likes Flash creatures that already do something on entering the board. Being legendary helps with the commander crowd, especially since the card scales with mana.
(2/3) Elegance: Pretty simple card on the surface. It's weird how it can bounce itself for repeated bouncing each turn. It feels like that isn't an intended function of the card, as it enters with +1/+1 counters, which don't serve any purpose in that case.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: There's an argument to be made for mythic. The effect has quite the impact and feels huge. Blue/white is a good fit.
(1.5/3) Balance: 5 mana 4/4 flying flash is already quite decent. Getting any number of card-free 1 mana unsommons which it is really strong. But on top of that, this enters with +1/+1 counters, which goes a bit too far for me.
Creativity -
(2/3) Uniqueness: Bouncing X creatures has been done on Alexi, Zephyr Mage, even if not as efficient. Combining Flash with the possibility to return it itself makes for quite the change.
(3/3) Flavor: Recall is a good name for the phrase. The name of the card sounds real nice and the flavortext makes for a cool story. I'm a bit sad she's replacing Bruna.
Polish -
(2.5/3) Quality: The reminder text feels a bit disconnected from the ability it's actually referencing. I think here a mentioning of what recalling actually is would have been in order, especially since you reference it again.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Check. At first I actually had an example in the clarification where I explained what I meant using 'return target creature to its owners hand', but then removed it, so it didn't feel like the players copied that. It certainly is something that's very fit to be keyworded.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Check and check.
Total: 21/25
StonerOfKruphix 21.5
glurman 21
IcariiFA 21
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
—Eli Shiffrin, Rules Manager, on a design stacking lifelink instances
(3/3) Appeal:
(3/3) Elegance:
Development
(3/3) Viability: Red/green works.
(2/3) Balance: For an uncommon, this is very strong. A 3 mana 3/3 that can turn into a Murderous Redcap at will is already strong, and the way this combos with things that remove -1/-1 counters or pump creatures is a little too good. Just think about how powerful this card is with Shed Weakness.
Creativity
(2/3) Uniqueness: It reminds me of Murderous Redcap a little too much.
(2/3) Flavor: The flavor text feels slightly off to me. I think you could have used a stronger adjective than "harm".
Polish
(2.5/3) Quality: There needs to be a space in between 1 and t after the comma. Also, it should be "deals damage equal to its power to that creature or player" in the reminder text.
(4/4) Challenges:
Total: 21.5/25
(3/3) Appeal: There's something for everyone here.
(3/3) Elegance:
Development
(3/3) Viability:
(1/3) Balance: This card is completely unbeatable in limited outside of a removal spell. Let's draw a common picture. For the first four turns of the game both you and your opponent have been developing minions to the board. On your fifth turn you jam this card and attack with your three creatures. Their creatures can't block, so you get through and restrain their entire team. That's a pretty powerful turn. However, it doesn't get any better for the opponent. Your guys are going to keep attacking and keep tapping their guys down forever unless they can find a removal spell. I get that it's a very hard to cast mythic rare, but "utterly unbeatable" isn't a good place to be.
Creativity
(3/3) Uniqueness:
(3/3) Flavor: The flavor text is short but sweet. "Arrester" isn't the best title for a card, but it works so I'll let it pass.
Polish
(3/3) Quality:
(4/4) Challenges:
Total: 23/25
(3/3) Appeal: There's something for everyone here.
(2/3) Elegance: There's a lot going on here. I'd have given you a lower score if it wasn't for the fact that the depth of this card far exceeds its wordiness.
Development
(3/3) Viability: I feel like black is missing from this card, as stealing the opponent's cards in this manner almost feels like a more black thing to do than a blue thing.
(2/3) Balance: I'm not a fan of how this card takes over any game it's in, and is very hard to kill, especially if you don't kill it the turn it comes down.
Creativity
(3/3) Uniqueness: Being able to cast their blinked cards is a new twist.
(2/3) Flavor: There's no real flavor to tie the card together other than "This is Lorren. He blinks and steals things."
Polish
(2.5/3) Quality: It should be "Exile that permanent." in the reminder text.
(4/4) Challenges:
Total: 21.5/25
(3/3) Appeal: There's something for everyone here.
(3/3) Elegance:
Development
(3/3) Viability:
(1/3) Balance: This card is pushed a little too hard, much like how Archangel Avacyn was. Casting this card for X=0 is already very powerful, and this card leads to a savage tempo swing later on in the game. I would have made it a 3/3. Additionally, there is the fact that this card can loop itself, essentially turning into a Capsize for X4WU later on in the game unless your opponent can produce a removal spell.
Creativity
(2.5/3) Uniqueness: There's not too much new going on here.
(3/3) Flavor: This flavor text isn't my favorite among the ones you've written, but it serves the card and the mechanics work together to form a good shell.
Polish
(2.5/3) Quality: It should be "Return those creatures to their owners' hands" in the flavor text. Perhaps BraveLion's fix of "To recall a creature,..." works better than mine also.
(4/4) Challenges:
Total: 22/25
Here's the details:
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
—Eli Shiffrin, Rules Manager, on a design stacking lifelink instances