After all the clues have been gathered, sometimes the investigators hit a wall, but with dogged determination (or sometimes luck) they find something that breaks the cast wide open.
Challenge: Design a card that lets you look at cards in a library. It could be your library or an opponent's library. Subchallenge 1: It is multicoloured or colourless. Subchallenge 2: Has a CMC of 5 or less.
(X/3) Appeal: Do the different player psychographics (Timmy/Johhny/Spike) have a use for the card? (X/3) Elegance: Is the card easily understandable at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
Development - (X/3) Viability: How well does the card fit into the color wheel? Does it break or bend the rules of the game? Is it the appropriate rarity? (X/3) Balance: Does the card have a power level appropriate for contemporary constructed/limited environments without breaking them? Does it play well in casual and multiplayer formats? Does it create or fit into a deck/archetype? Does it create an oppressive environment?
Creativity - (X/3) Uniqueness: Has a card like this ever been printed before? Does it use new mechanics, ideas, or design space? Does it combine old ideas in a new way? Overall, does it feel “fresh”? (X/3) Flavor: Does the name seem realistic for a card? Does the flavor text sound professional? Do all the flavor elements synch together to please Vorthos players?
Polish - (X/3) Quality: Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating. (X/2) *Main Challenge: Was the main challenge satisfied? Was it approached in a unique or interesting way? Does the card fit the intent of the challenge? (X/2) Subchallenges: One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Total: X/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
DEADLINES In green, the next deadline to come.
In blue, further future deadlines to come.
In red, past deadlines.
Player deadline: Thursday, April 21st 2016 23:59 EDT
Judge deadline: Monday, April 25th 2016 23:59 EDT
Brilliant Idea
Instant (R)
Search your library for an instant or sorcery card with converted mana cost X or less, exile that card, then shuffle your library. You may cast that card without paying its mana cost. "If you just dig deep enough, I'm sure you'll come up with something."
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
(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)
Judgmental Crowd1WB
Creature - Human (U)
Whenever Judgmental Crowd enters the battlefield, you may look at the top three cards of target opponent's library and put them on the bottom of her or her library in any order, then choose a creature type.
Whenever a creature of the chosen type enters the battlefield, each opponent loses one life and you gain life equal to the amount of life lost this way. "Oh, you're one of those."
3/3
Pertinent Discovery3UB
Sorcery (R)
Search your library for up to two cards with the same name, reveal them, and put them into your hand. Then shuffle your library. "Helga begat unto Orid three identical sons."
- Lead Investigator Olhaum, reading from the Book of Lineage
Legendary Creature - Human Wizard [Mythic Rare]
At the beginning of each opponent's upkeep, you may look at the top card of that player's library. You may put that card on the bottom of its owner's library unless he or she pays 1 life.
2/1 "You may have free will if you can afford it."
Dowsing Rod3
Artifact (U)
As Dowsing Rod enters the battlefield, name a card. 2, T: Look at the top two cards of your library. You may reveal a card with the chosen name from among them and put it into your hand. Put the rest on the top or bottom of your library in any order.
PsycharchetecturingXUB
Sorcery (R)
Search target opponent’s library for up to X cards, half of which, rounded down, must be lands and the rest of which must be nonlands, and reveal them to that player. He or she shuffles his or her library, then puts those cards on top of his or her library in any order. “A nightmare for you, from you, by me.”
-Ashiok
EDIT: I've written all my judgments before looking at other judges' ones obviously. Now that I've looked at them, I can just say I'm really amazed at how much my and LnGrrrR's judgments on the Tesco(black)lotus vs glurman matchup differ. I take it as a testament to the fact that even though we have a rubric that tries to be as objective as possible (and I personally feel it does a good job at that, not perfect of course but more than good enough), there is still a lot of subjectivity involved in judging. I'm really sorry for glurman, which in my opinion would have totally deserved to pass, but I just can't adjust the scores so that the one I prefer passes. Now, that would be unfair and dishonest on my part, and I have a conscience. This is just a thought I wanted to express publicly and doesn't influence the following judgments in any way.
Check my "Mark of Quality" articles (link in signature) for a list of the most common Quality mistakes to avoid.
Challenges: what counts is always the letter of the law, unless explicit specifications of the host.
Quality: half a point deducted for any error in templating, wording, spelling, or grammar, no matter how little they may be; a whole point for particularly serious errors.
No complaints unless I got something objectively wrong.
Conjurer of Nightmares1UB
Creature - Naga Wizard (R)
Face-down creatures you control have menace. UB, Sacrifice a face-up creature: Look at the top two cards of target player's library, then manifest one of them. She twists your greatest wish into your worst fear.
0/4
Design (2/3) Appeal - I don't think Timmy would care that much. Johnny loves that activated ability, there are so many things he can do with that. Spike likes the evasion-granting, especially when there is a built-in way of generating face-down creatures. (3/3) Elegance - I see no problems here.
Development (3/3) Viability - All colors get manifest, menace is black, looking at the top two cards is blue. Color pie: check! Rarity feels good to me. (2.5/3) Balance - This is certainly playable in limited, and I wouldn't be surprised if it saw some constructed play in a format like KTK Standard with a lot of face-down creatures to grant evasion to from morph and manifest. I can't see it in bigger constructed formats, but that's not necessarily a problem. I can't see particular problems in casual and multiplayer except for the fact that some players might find a little unfun to see their cards stolen from the top of their decks and manifested by their opponents. That feels like just a minor thing to me though.
Creativity (3/3) Uniqueness - Giving abilities exclusively to face-down creatures is something I can't remember having seen before and feels very original, as does the cost of sacrificing a face-up creature. (3/3) Flavor - The name may feel a bit generic but the whole package of name, flavor text and mechanics still works very well. Bonus points for using the Naga creature type, that makes a lot of sense with the rest of the card.
Polish (2.5/3) Quality - Manifest is a block keyword so it would certainly have reminder text (half a point deducted). (2/2) Main Challenge - Good. (2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Falkenrath Oracle3BR
Creature - Vampire Wizard (R)
Flying, Lifelink, Haste
Pay 3 life: Put a +1/+1 counter on Falkenrath Oracle, scry 1, and draw a card. Activate this ability only once per turn. (To scry 1, look at the top card of your library. You may put that card on the bottom of your library.) "People pay in blood to see their future often to discover they no longer have one."
2/3
Design (2.5/3) Appeal - Timmy feels this is a bit small but he forgives that very easily as soon as he reads that list of keywords and realizes this can easily grow. He doesn't like that much paying life though. Johnny can use the scry and draw to dig into his library. Spike would have liked this to start a little bigger too, but he still likes how efficient the whole package is. (2.5/3) Elegance - A bit on the wordy side but still very clear and easily understandable.
Development (3/3) Viability - Everything is in color and rarity is the least it can be. (3/3) Balance - Even though some players might be slightly disappointed at first to see a 2/3 for five mana, this definitely looks like it's worth it. I'd play this for sure in any limited format, especially one like SOI. It could also see some Standard play in Vampire and/or just Rakdos-colored decks, but I can't see it in bigger formats (not a big problem anyway). I see no problems in casual or multiplayer.
Creativity (1/3) Uniqueness - Nothing in this card is particularly original. The very good flavor helps some but not much. (3/3) Flavor - The name is fine and fits well with the scry. I love the flavor text, it reflects very nicely the mechanics and makes a lot of sense even without considering that.
Polish (0/3) Quality - In a list of keyword only the first one is capitalized and only if it's at the beginning of the line. This means both lifelink and haste should not be capitalized in this case (two times half a point makes one point deducted). "and draw a card" would certainly be "then draw a card" on a real card (half a point deducted), just like "once per turn" would be "once each turn" (half a point deducted). Reminder text must be in italics (this is a very well known and basic rule of Magic editing, so one whole point deducted). (2/2) Main Challenge - Scry lets you look at some number of cards in your library so it's good to me. (2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Legendary Creature - Human Wizard [Mythic Rare]
At the beginning of each opponent's upkeep, you may look at the top card of that player's library. You may put that card on the bottom of its owner's library unless he or she pays 1 life.
2/1 "You may have free will if you can afford it."
Design (0.5/3) Appeal - Timmy doesn't care except for griefers, which are a subset of Timmy. Johnny and Spike would like this much better if this triggered at the beginning of their upkeep too to let them dig into their libraries. (3/3) Elegance - All good here.
Development (1/3) Viability - This effect feels good in blue/black, so no big problems with the color pie. I don't see any particular reason why this couldn't be a regular rare. It doesn't feel mythic to me and it's not so complex. The only reason I can think of is the unfun gameplay, but if it's unfun, why print it in the first place? In fact, I don't really think this card would see print today (and rightly so in my opinion, more on that in a moment). (0.5/3) Balance - This looks playable in limited but I can't see this in constructed, and I'm thankful for that, because the gameplay this implies doesn't look fun at all. There's a reason fateseal hasn't been actually used after the glimpse of it in Future Sight, and it's likely it will never be used at all. This card is a noble attempt at making fateseal acceptable by attaching an optional life payment to it, but I feel like this is a failed attempt. I just don't think there is any realistic way of making fateseal fun.
Creativity (0.5/3) Uniqueness - We've already seen fateseal (unfortunately) and this is just a minor twist on it. (3/3) Flavor - The flavor is very good here. Both the name and the flavor text make a lot of sense with the mechanics and the overall card concept.
Polish (2.5/3) Quality - An unneeded line break between the name and the type line (half a point deducted). I would have also liked to see flavor text before power and toughness, as it's usual in text cards posted here, but no deduction as they're still both there. (2/2) Main Challenge - Good. (2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Pertinent Discovery3UB
Sorcery (R)
Search your library for up to two cards with the same name, reveal them, and put them into your hand. Then shuffle your library. "Helga begat unto Orid three identical sons."
- Lead Investigator Olhaum, reading from the Book of Lineage
Design (2.5/3) Appeal - Maybe Timmy could use this card to look for big creatures to play right after it, but nothing more than that. Johnny and Spike really like this card: the former to dig into his library and find combo pieces and the latter as card advantage. (3/3) Elegance - All good here.
Development (3/3) Viability - This could have easily been just a monoblack card, but it still makes sense in Dimir colors too. Rarity is good. (2/3) Balance - Costing one mana (and one color) more than Diabolic Tutor in exchange for giving you one more card feels very fair to me. This is a card you're much more likely to play in constructed than in limited, as in limited it's much harder to have multiples and you usually want your nonland noncreature slots to be devoted to other kinds of cards. I think this is quite playable in constructed in the right deck. There's still the known issue of the innate repetitivity of play generated by tutors, which can be unfun to some players (not to me by the way, but I still have to keep into account that it's a potential problem).
Creativity (1.5/3) Uniqueness - This is a twist on the classic tutoring effect. New indeed, but nothing to write home about. (2.5/3) Flavor - The flavor works very well in this card, there is only one way it could have been even better: make the number of Helga and Orid's children equal to the number of cards you search for in your library. That's just a minor detail, but it's one of those aesthetic details you only notice when they're slightly off. For all the rest, very good work here.
Polish (3/3) Quality - All good. (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.)
PsycharchetecturingXUB
Sorcery (R)
Search target opponent’s library for up to X cards, half of which, rounded down, must be lands and the rest of which must be nonlands, and reveal them to that player. He or she shuffles his or her library, then puts those cards on top of his or her library in any order. “A nightmare for you, from you, by me.”
-Ashiok
Design -
(0/3) Appeal: I'm not seeing who likes playing this card. Maybe Johnny, but it's generally not much more than a strange and weak finisher.
(1.5/3) Elegance: I had to reread it.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: No issues.
(0/3) Balance: This card is painfully weak in almost any format I can imagine. I'm tempted to say the best value for X is 0, just so you can see your opponent's deck.
Creativity -
(3/3) Uniqueness: Very unique.
(3/3) Flavor: Very flavorful. I might make the placement on top of the library either random or the caster's choice.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
(2/2) *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?
(2/2) Subchallenges: One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Total: 17.5/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Dowsing Rod3
Artifact (U)
As Dowsing Rod enters the battlefield, name a card. 2, T: Look at the top two cards of your library. You may reveal a card with the chosen name from among them and put it into your hand. Put the rest on the top or bottom of your library in any order.
Design -
(1.5/3) Appeal: If this card was cheaper then combo players might have a reason to be interested. As is, it's too weak for constructed.
(2.5/3) Elegance: Slightly long-winded.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: No issues.
(2/3) Balance: Weak in constructed, interesting in Limited.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
(2/2) *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?
(2/2) Subchallenges: One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Total: 22.5/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Judge's Note: My version would be:
Dowsing Rod
Artifact [U]
As Dowsing Rod enters the battlefield, name a nonland card. T: Reveal the top 2 cards of your library. Put all cards with a name matching the chosen name into your hand. Put the rest into your graveyard.
Judgmental Crowd1WB
Creature - Human (U)
Whenever Judgmental Crowd enters the battlefield, you may look at the top three cards of target opponent's library and put them on the bottom of her or her library in any order, then choose a creature type.
Whenever a creature of the chosen type enters the battlefield, each opponent loses one life and you gain life equal to the amount of life lost this way. "Oh, you're one of those."
3/3
Design -
(1/3) Appeal: Not really? Except in a tribal block, where Spike would use it obviously.
(2/3) Elegance: I understand the whole "looking at then bottoming the top three cards" mechanic but it feels like it's a meaningless ability in a lot of games.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: No issues.
(3/3) Balance: No issues.
Creativity -
(3/3) Uniqueness: Despite my earlier criticism, I do appreciate the uniqueness of the first mechanic.
(1/3) Flavor: The name doesn't sound fantastical, nor does the flavor text. Not sure why each opponent loses life as opposed to just the controller.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
(2/2) *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?
(2/2) Subchallenges: One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Total: 20/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Brilliant Idea
Instant (R)
Search your library for an instant or sorcery card with converted mana cost X or less, exile that card, then shuffle your library. You may cast that card without paying its mana cost. "If you just dig deep enough, I'm sure you'll come up with something."
Design -
(3/3) Appeal: Yes to all.
(3/3) Elegance: Very easy to understand.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: No issues.
(0/3) Balance: Living End and Ancestral Visions make this card incredibly overpowered in modern.
Creativity -
(1/3) Uniqueness: Wargate, Teachings, etc. The part that's unique is also the part that makes it broken.
(2.5/3) Flavor: Fun concept.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
(2/2) *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?
(2/2) Subchallenges: One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Total: 19.5/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Legendary Creature - Human Wizard [Mythic Rare]
At the beginning of each opponent's upkeep, you may look at the top card of that player's library. You may put that card on the bottom of its owner's library unless he or she pays 1 life.
2/1 "You may have free will if you can afford it."
Design -
(2/3) Appeal: I think this appeals to a good amount of players, but probably Timmies the least, as it's quite a subtle card. While I don't have a lot of experience in it, I've heard dealing with a repeated fateseal can be quite a pain. I imagine it would be so especially in control colors like these. Spikes hate punisher mechanics so they will likely dismiss it outright, but some Johnnies will likely try to make it work anyways. It's quite Vorthos-y.
(2.5/3) Elegance: I think the card makes sense, and is pretty obvious. I'm guessing that the word "inquisitor" is pulling double duty here as a reference to inquisitors of a certain kind that no one expects.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: Fateseal is a blue ability. Usually black pays its own life to do something, rather than making others pay life, but it's still solidly in black. Killing Wave comes to mind. Mythic rarity fits, though I think I would've made it an unnamed card and taken the legendary bit off of it. Not sure if that would have made it too oppressive, but with it only having one toughness I don't think it would be too bad.
(2.5/3) Balance: I think this could easily work in multiple formats. Probably not good enough for T1 standard or modern, but I could envision a weird deck sneaking into tournaments with this and the right control pieces.
Creativity -
(3/3) Uniqueness: There aren't a heck of a lot of cards that can do what this can do. JTMS, Precognition and a few others, so it's design space worth exploring. And the life rider makes it so the card isn't too oppressive.
(2.25/3) Flavor: I don't know if the flavor text is "epic" enough for the card. When I think of paying for stuff, that usually feels like it's in the white or BW wheelhouse. I would've associated it with the idea of stripping memories away from someone unless they were willing to absorb pain. Something along the lines of, "How long do you think you can hold out?" (That sucks but it gets the point across more.) I don't really see UB as "allowing" free will.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Looks good.
(2/2) *Main Challenge: Main challenge satisfied. I also like that you went with the harder "look at opponent's library" than your own.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both conditions met.
Pertinent Discovery3UB
Sorcery (R)
Search your library for up to two cards with the same name, reveal them, and put them into your hand. Then shuffle your library. "Helga begat unto Orid three identical sons."
- Lead Investigator Olhaum, reading from the Book of Lineage
Design -
(1.5/3) Appeal: I think this is mostly a Timmy card, as I don't know if this would appeal to Spikes. Pulling any two cards is much stronger than having to pull two of the SAME card, and really reduces the ability to combo.
(2.5/3) Elegance: The card is relatively simple to understand.
Development -
(1.5/3) Viability: I'm not quite sure why this card is blue, other than flavor reasons and to meet the subchallenge. I guess it somewhat fits the flavor of cloning, but that feels like a stretch since the flavor text doesn't refer to cloning. Rare is appropriate.
(1/3) Balance: I'm not sure what deck would want to slot this over Diabolic Revelation. It's two mana less if searching for two cards, but requires an extra color, so I don't know if it's competitive enough for any standard/modern/legacy/vintage deck. And obviously, this is pretty much unplayable in EDH.
Creativity -
(1/3) Uniqueness: Tutoring has been done before in black. I get where you were trying to go with it, I just don't think you got there.
(1/3) Flavor: First, I'm not a huge fan of "Random name did something at random place with random name", especially in a custom card, because we just don't have the backstory to get any sort of "ah cool" from that. Second, if she begat three identical sons... why does this only let you look for two cards? I know that limiting CMC isn't usually on my many UB cards, but maybe this could have been a riff on Collected Company instead?
PsycharchetecturingXUB
Sorcery (R)
Search target opponent’s library for up to X cards, half of which, rounded down, must be lands and the rest of which must be nonlands, and reveal them to that player. He or she shuffles his or her library, then puts those cards on top of his or her library in any order. “A nightmare for you, from you, by me.”
-Ashiok
Design -
(1/3) Appeal: I'm not quite sure who this would appeal to. Johnnies, maybe? I can't imagine Spikes or Timmies getting super into it, and a UB focus on lands seems... strange, especially since Ashiok doesn't really have any mechanics that tie into lands.
(1.5/3) Elegance: That name is... just horrific. I understand trying to work the portmanteau, but it just didn't work right rolling off my tongue. (Probably tripping all over it.) The card makes sense, but I could see a player casting the spell and thinking he or she gets to order the cards off the top of their library, instead of the other person.
Development -
(2/3) Viability: So blue cards that search an opponent's library is usually to cast/steal them, and black usually exiles them. Blue has some "put cards on top of the library" cards, but the land focus still throws me.
(1/3) Balance: I'm not sure what this card is trying to do. The player gets to order the cards, so if they need land, they get to put it on top. If they need gas, they put that on top and then the land. If you could order the cards it'd be much stronger, but also more oppressive, and would require a far higher casting cost. I think this card would require far too much buildaround to be worth it. If this card was green and blue/black, and let you target yourself, it would be more useful.
Creativity -
(2/3) Uniqueness: Searching opponent's library and putting cards on top is an interesting combo; I just don't think it was effectively captured here.
(1/3) Flavor: I already talked about the card name above, and wondered why Ashiok is messing with lands. I don't know if giving someone lands is necessarily a nightmare. Maybe a card that removed X amount of lands? Not sure how I'd represent that "psychic landscape horror" that you're going for.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
(2/2) *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?
(2/2) Subchallenges: One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Total: 15.5/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Dowsing Rod3
Artifact (U)
As Dowsing Rod enters the battlefield, name a card. 2, T: Look at the top two cards of your library. You may reveal a card with the chosen name from among them and put it into your hand. Put the rest on the top or bottom of your library in any order.
Design -
(2/3) Appeal: Card advantage is always appreciated by players. Spikes would likely break it in extended formats, and in a standard that relied on top deck manipulation it would strong. The Vorthos flavor is strong... though it should only allow you to search for Islands. (Wah wah wahhhhhh.)
(2.5/3) Elegance: I think most people know what a dowsing rod is, and if not, the art direction should make it pretty clear.
Development -
(2/3) Viability: It's an artifact, and so it's hard to say it's not part of the color wheel. That said, there's precedence for this in things like Divining Top, and if used as ramp, then Journeyer's Kite. That said, most artifacts that search for cards to put into your hand sacrifice themselves. I think I would make this a rare. Crystal Ball is the same CMC, has one less activation, and scrys for 2 also. This card lets you scry for two PLUS possibly put a card into your hand.
(1.5/3) Balance: I think this would need to either be a rare, or be changed so that you can only name a non-land card, increase the activation cost, etc etc. This card would likely be used in a lot of different decks because it filters and creates card advantage, and it could probably go into a number of decks.
Creativity -
(2.5/3) Uniqueness: I like the combination of abilities along with the flavor, but I wouldn't like all the extra time the opponent used scrying.
(3/3) Flavor: The flavor comes together nicely. I like the quirkiness of making it a Dowsing Rod... other ideas such as a X-type detector would've worked too.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
(2/2) *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?
(2/2) Subchallenges: One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Thanks to all for submitting cards. Glurman, Ink-treader, I just didn't know what your cards were trying to achieve. If I'm missing something, let me know. I really liked theazurespirit's card, but ultimately I think the balance of Tesco's card is stronger. I think that Dowsing Rod would be one of those cards that people discount until they play, then everyone is bemoaning it when some UR deck is taking every match to time with it.
(1/3) Appeal: Johnny has Conspiracy for it, and that's about it.
(2/3) Elegance: The first ability had me scratching my head as to why I'm allowed to put the cards I looked at on top or on the bottom of that library, especially since I can name a creature type I have.
Development -
(2/3) Viability: The first ability feels too much like a blue ability.
(3/3) Balance: No problems here.
Creativity -
(3/3) Uniqueness: The first ability is new.
(3/3) Flavor: No problems here.
Polish -
(2/3) Quality: “When CARDNAME enters the battlefield...”
“... each opponent loses 1 life...”
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met.
Total: 20/25
Design -
(2/3) Appeal: Timmy might like this, as would Spike.
(3/3) Elegance: No problems here.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: No problems here.
(1/3) Balance: It may be better off as a sorcery, but the biggest issue is that you can cast cards like Ancestral Vision and Living End.
Creativity -
(1/3) Uniqueness: It's a little too close to Bring to Light.
(3/3) Flavor: No problems here.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: No problems here.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met
Total: 20/25
Design -
(2/3) Appeal: Johnny might find a combo for it. Spike might play with it.
(3/3) Elegance: No problems here.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: No problems here.
(2/3) Balance: I don't think giving face-down creatures is necessary. I think the ability to steal your opponent's cards is enough.
Creativity -
(3/3) Uniqueness: It has several new parts.
(3/3) Flavor: No problems here.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: No problems here.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met
Total: 23/25
Design -
(1/3) Appeal: Timmy might like this.
(3/3) Elegance: No problems here.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: No problems here.
(2/3) Balance: It could have made do without the lifelink. Otherwise, this is like Griselbrand.
Creativity -
(2/3) Uniqueness: Nothing here that hasn't been done before, but it doesn't remind me of any other card.
(3/3) Flavor: No problems here.
Polish -
(1/3) Quality: So many mistakes. It should looks like this:
Flying, lifelink, haste (capitalization errors)
Pay 3 life: Put a +1/+1 counter on CARDNAME, the scry 1, then draw a card. Activate this ability only once each turn. (To scry 1, look at the top card of your library. You may put that card on the bottom of your library.) (Reminder text has to ba italicized.)
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met.
Total: 19/25
As always, no complaints.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
ANATOMY OF A MYSTERY
Round 3: The Break
After all the clues have been gathered, sometimes the investigators hit a wall, but with dogged determination (or sometimes luck) they find something that breaks the cast wide open.
Challenge: Design a card that lets you look at cards in a library. It could be your library or an opponent's library.
Subchallenge 1: It is multicoloured or colourless.
Subchallenge 2: Has a CMC of 5 or less.
MCC Rules
(X/3) Appeal: Do the different player psychographics (Timmy/Johhny/Spike) have a use for the card?
(X/3) Elegance: Is the card easily understandable at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
Development -
(X/3) Viability: How well does the card fit into the color wheel? Does it break or bend the rules of the game? Is it the appropriate rarity?
(X/3) Balance: Does the card have a power level appropriate for contemporary constructed/limited environments without breaking them? Does it play well in casual and multiplayer formats? Does it create or fit into a deck/archetype? Does it create an oppressive environment?
Creativity -
(X/3) Uniqueness: Has a card like this ever been printed before? Does it use new mechanics, ideas, or design space? Does it combine old ideas in a new way? Overall, does it feel “fresh”?
(X/3) Flavor: Does the name seem realistic for a card? Does the flavor text sound professional? Do all the flavor elements synch together to please Vorthos players?
Polish -
(X/3) Quality: Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
(X/2) *Main Challenge: Was the main challenge satisfied? Was it approached in a unique or interesting way? Does the card fit the intent of the challenge?
(X/2) Subchallenges: One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Total: X/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
DEADLINES
In green, the next deadline to come.
In blue, further future deadlines to come.
In red, past deadlines.
Player deadline: Thursday, April 21st 2016 23:59 EDT
Judge deadline: Monday, April 25th 2016 23:59 EDT
Judges:
Moss_Elemental
bravelion83
LnGrrrR
aurorasparrow
Players:
Flatline
glurman
Ink-Treader
Jimmy Groove
Rhand*sunshinesoldier
Tesco(black)lotus
theazurespirit
thenoodler
Good luck, everyone.
*Players in LnGrrrR's bracket can submit cards. It's just a matter of patience.
Instant (R)
Search your library for an instant or sorcery card with converted mana cost X or less, exile that card, then shuffle your library. You may cast that card without paying its mana cost.
"If you just dig deep enough, I'm sure you'll come up with something."
Creature - Human (U)
Whenever Judgmental Crowd enters the battlefield, you may look at the top three cards of target opponent's library and put them on the bottom of her or her library in any order, then choose a creature type.
Whenever a creature of the chosen type enters the battlefield, each opponent loses one life and you gain life equal to the amount of life lost this way.
"Oh, you're one of those."
3/3
Sorcery (R)
Search your library for up to two cards with the same name, reveal them, and put them into your hand. Then shuffle your library.
"Helga begat unto Orid three identical sons."
- Lead Investigator Olhaum, reading from the Book of Lineage
Legendary Creature - Human Wizard [Mythic Rare]
At the beginning of each opponent's upkeep, you may look at the top card of that player's library. You may put that card on the bottom of its owner's library unless he or she pays 1 life.
2/1
"You may have free will if you can afford it."
Artifact (U)
As Dowsing Rod enters the battlefield, name a card.
2, T: Look at the top two cards of your library. You may reveal a card with the chosen name from among them and put it into your hand. Put the rest on the top or bottom of your library in any order.
Sorcery (R)
Search target opponent’s library for up to X cards, half of which, rounded down, must be lands and the rest of which must be nonlands, and reveal them to that player. He or she shuffles his or her library, then puts those cards on top of his or her library in any order.
“A nightmare for you, from you, by me.”
-Ashiok
Choose one of these judge of creation:
Make Strionic Resonator shine!
You can not grasp the true form of Ashiok's attack!
Moss_Elemental:
Jimmy Groove vs. Flatline
thenoodler vs. sunshinesoldier
bravelion83:
thenoodler vs. sunshinesoldier
Tesco(black)lotus vs. glurman
LnGrrrR:
Tesco(black)lotus vs. glurman
Ink-Treader vs. theazurespirit
aurorasparrow:
Ink-Treader vs. theazurespirit
Jimmy Groove vs. Flatline
EDIT: I've written all my judgments before looking at other judges' ones obviously. Now that I've looked at them, I can just say I'm really amazed at how much my and LnGrrrR's judgments on the Tesco(black)lotus vs glurman matchup differ. I take it as a testament to the fact that even though we have a rubric that tries to be as objective as possible (and I personally feel it does a good job at that, not perfect of course but more than good enough), there is still a lot of subjectivity involved in judging. I'm really sorry for glurman, which in my opinion would have totally deserved to pass, but I just can't adjust the scores so that the one I prefer passes. Now, that would be unfair and dishonest on my part, and I have a conscience. This is just a thought I wanted to express publicly and doesn't influence the following judgments in any way.
Check my "Mark of Quality" articles (link in signature) for a list of the most common Quality mistakes to avoid.
Challenges: what counts is always the letter of the law, unless explicit specifications of the host.
Quality: half a point deducted for any error in templating, wording, spelling, or grammar, no matter how little they may be; a whole point for particularly serious errors.
No complaints unless I got something objectively wrong.
Design
(2/3) Appeal - I don't think Timmy would care that much. Johnny loves that activated ability, there are so many things he can do with that. Spike likes the evasion-granting, especially when there is a built-in way of generating face-down creatures.
(3/3) Elegance - I see no problems here.
Development
(3/3) Viability - All colors get manifest, menace is black, looking at the top two cards is blue. Color pie: check! Rarity feels good to me.
(2.5/3) Balance - This is certainly playable in limited, and I wouldn't be surprised if it saw some constructed play in a format like KTK Standard with a lot of face-down creatures to grant evasion to from morph and manifest. I can't see it in bigger constructed formats, but that's not necessarily a problem. I can't see particular problems in casual and multiplayer except for the fact that some players might find a little unfun to see their cards stolen from the top of their decks and manifested by their opponents. That feels like just a minor thing to me though.
Creativity
(3/3) Uniqueness - Giving abilities exclusively to face-down creatures is something I can't remember having seen before and feels very original, as does the cost of sacrificing a face-up creature.
(3/3) Flavor - The name may feel a bit generic but the whole package of name, flavor text and mechanics still works very well. Bonus points for using the Naga creature type, that makes a lot of sense with the rest of the card.
Polish
(2.5/3) Quality - Manifest is a block keyword so it would certainly have reminder text (half a point deducted).
(2/2) Main Challenge - Good.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 23/25
Design
(2.5/3) Appeal - Timmy feels this is a bit small but he forgives that very easily as soon as he reads that list of keywords and realizes this can easily grow. He doesn't like that much paying life though. Johnny can use the scry and draw to dig into his library. Spike would have liked this to start a little bigger too, but he still likes how efficient the whole package is.
(2.5/3) Elegance - A bit on the wordy side but still very clear and easily understandable.
Development
(3/3) Viability - Everything is in color and rarity is the least it can be.
(3/3) Balance - Even though some players might be slightly disappointed at first to see a 2/3 for five mana, this definitely looks like it's worth it. I'd play this for sure in any limited format, especially one like SOI. It could also see some Standard play in Vampire and/or just Rakdos-colored decks, but I can't see it in bigger formats (not a big problem anyway). I see no problems in casual or multiplayer.
Creativity
(1/3) Uniqueness - Nothing in this card is particularly original. The very good flavor helps some but not much.
(3/3) Flavor - The name is fine and fits well with the scry. I love the flavor text, it reflects very nicely the mechanics and makes a lot of sense even without considering that.
Polish
(0/3) Quality - In a list of keyword only the first one is capitalized and only if it's at the beginning of the line. This means both lifelink and haste should not be capitalized in this case (two times half a point makes one point deducted). "and draw a card" would certainly be "then draw a card" on a real card (half a point deducted), just like "once per turn" would be "once each turn" (half a point deducted). Reminder text must be in italics (this is a very well known and basic rule of Magic editing, so one whole point deducted).
(2/2) Main Challenge - Scry lets you look at some number of cards in your library so it's good to me.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 19/25
Design
(0.5/3) Appeal - Timmy doesn't care except for griefers, which are a subset of Timmy. Johnny and Spike would like this much better if this triggered at the beginning of their upkeep too to let them dig into their libraries.
(3/3) Elegance - All good here.
Development
(1/3) Viability - This effect feels good in blue/black, so no big problems with the color pie. I don't see any particular reason why this couldn't be a regular rare. It doesn't feel mythic to me and it's not so complex. The only reason I can think of is the unfun gameplay, but if it's unfun, why print it in the first place? In fact, I don't really think this card would see print today (and rightly so in my opinion, more on that in a moment).
(0.5/3) Balance - This looks playable in limited but I can't see this in constructed, and I'm thankful for that, because the gameplay this implies doesn't look fun at all. There's a reason fateseal hasn't been actually used after the glimpse of it in Future Sight, and it's likely it will never be used at all. This card is a noble attempt at making fateseal acceptable by attaching an optional life payment to it, but I feel like this is a failed attempt. I just don't think there is any realistic way of making fateseal fun.
Creativity
(0.5/3) Uniqueness - We've already seen fateseal (unfortunately) and this is just a minor twist on it.
(3/3) Flavor - The flavor is very good here. Both the name and the flavor text make a lot of sense with the mechanics and the overall card concept.
Polish
(2.5/3) Quality - An unneeded line break between the name and the type line (half a point deducted). I would have also liked to see flavor text before power and toughness, as it's usual in text cards posted here, but no deduction as they're still both there.
(2/2) Main Challenge - Good.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 15/25
Design
(2.5/3) Appeal - Maybe Timmy could use this card to look for big creatures to play right after it, but nothing more than that. Johnny and Spike really like this card: the former to dig into his library and find combo pieces and the latter as card advantage.
(3/3) Elegance - All good here.
Development
(3/3) Viability - This could have easily been just a monoblack card, but it still makes sense in Dimir colors too. Rarity is good.
(2/3) Balance - Costing one mana (and one color) more than Diabolic Tutor in exchange for giving you one more card feels very fair to me. This is a card you're much more likely to play in constructed than in limited, as in limited it's much harder to have multiples and you usually want your nonland noncreature slots to be devoted to other kinds of cards. I think this is quite playable in constructed in the right deck. There's still the known issue of the innate repetitivity of play generated by tutors, which can be unfun to some players (not to me by the way, but I still have to keep into account that it's a potential problem).
Creativity
(1.5/3) Uniqueness - This is a twist on the classic tutoring effect. New indeed, but nothing to write home about.
(2.5/3) Flavor - The flavor works very well in this card, there is only one way it could have been even better: make the number of Helga and Orid's children equal to the number of cards you search for in your library. That's just a minor detail, but it's one of those aesthetic details you only notice when they're slightly off. For all the rest, very good work here.
Polish
(3/3) Quality - All good.
(2/2) Main Challenge - Good.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.
Total: 21.5/25
thenoodler: 23
sunshinesoldier: 19
Tesco(black)lotus: 15
glurman: 21.5
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 -
(0/3) Appeal: I'm not seeing who likes playing this card. Maybe Johnny, but it's generally not much more than a strange and weak finisher.
(1.5/3) Elegance: I had to reread it.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: No issues.
(0/3) Balance: This card is painfully weak in almost any format I can imagine. I'm tempted to say the best value for X is 0, just so you can see your opponent's deck.
Creativity -
(3/3) Uniqueness: Very unique.
(3/3) Flavor: Very flavorful. I might make the placement on top of the library either random or the caster's choice.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
(2/2) *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?
(2/2) Subchallenges: One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Total: 17.5/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Design -
(1.5/3) Appeal: If this card was cheaper then combo players might have a reason to be interested. As is, it's too weak for constructed.
(2.5/3) Elegance: Slightly long-winded.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: No issues.
(2/3) Balance: Weak in constructed, interesting in Limited.
Creativity -
(3/3) Uniqueness: Pretty fresh!
(2.5/3) Flavor: Nice flavor.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
(2/2) *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?
(2/2) Subchallenges: One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Total: 22.5/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Judge's Note: My version would be:
Dowsing Rod
Artifact [U]
As Dowsing Rod enters the battlefield, name a nonland card.
T: Reveal the top 2 cards of your library. Put all cards with a name matching the chosen name into your hand. Put the rest into your graveyard.
Design -
(1/3) Appeal: Not really? Except in a tribal block, where Spike would use it obviously.
(2/3) Elegance: I understand the whole "looking at then bottoming the top three cards" mechanic but it feels like it's a meaningless ability in a lot of games.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: No issues.
(3/3) Balance: No issues.
Creativity -
(3/3) Uniqueness: Despite my earlier criticism, I do appreciate the uniqueness of the first mechanic.
(1/3) Flavor: The name doesn't sound fantastical, nor does the flavor text. Not sure why each opponent loses life as opposed to just the controller.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
(2/2) *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?
(2/2) Subchallenges: One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Total: 20/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Design -
(3/3) Appeal: Yes to all.
(3/3) Elegance: Very easy to understand.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: No issues.
(0/3) Balance: Living End and Ancestral Visions make this card incredibly overpowered in modern.
Creativity -
(1/3) Uniqueness: Wargate, Teachings, etc. The part that's unique is also the part that makes it broken.
(2.5/3) Flavor: Fun concept.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
(2/2) *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?
(2/2) Subchallenges: One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Total: 19.5/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
theazuredrake
Jimmy Groove
4th place at CCC&G Pro Tour
Chances of bad hands (<2 or >4 land):
21: 28.9%
22: 27.5%
23: 26.3%
24: 25.5%
25: 25.1%
26: 25.3%
Design -
(2/3) Appeal: I think this appeals to a good amount of players, but probably Timmies the least, as it's quite a subtle card. While I don't have a lot of experience in it, I've heard dealing with a repeated fateseal can be quite a pain. I imagine it would be so especially in control colors like these. Spikes hate punisher mechanics so they will likely dismiss it outright, but some Johnnies will likely try to make it work anyways. It's quite Vorthos-y.
(2.5/3) Elegance: I think the card makes sense, and is pretty obvious. I'm guessing that the word "inquisitor" is pulling double duty here as a reference to inquisitors of a certain kind that no one expects.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: Fateseal is a blue ability. Usually black pays its own life to do something, rather than making others pay life, but it's still solidly in black. Killing Wave comes to mind. Mythic rarity fits, though I think I would've made it an unnamed card and taken the legendary bit off of it. Not sure if that would have made it too oppressive, but with it only having one toughness I don't think it would be too bad.
(2.5/3) Balance: I think this could easily work in multiple formats. Probably not good enough for T1 standard or modern, but I could envision a weird deck sneaking into tournaments with this and the right control pieces.
Creativity -
(3/3) Uniqueness: There aren't a heck of a lot of cards that can do what this can do. JTMS, Precognition and a few others, so it's design space worth exploring. And the life rider makes it so the card isn't too oppressive.
(2.25/3) Flavor: I don't know if the flavor text is "epic" enough for the card. When I think of paying for stuff, that usually feels like it's in the white or BW wheelhouse. I would've associated it with the idea of stripping memories away from someone unless they were willing to absorb pain. Something along the lines of, "How long do you think you can hold out?" (That sucks but it gets the point across more.) I don't really see UB as "allowing" free will.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Looks good.
(2/2) *Main Challenge: Main challenge satisfied. I also like that you went with the harder "look at opponent's library" than your own.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both conditions met.
Total: 22.25/25
Design -
(1.5/3) Appeal: I think this is mostly a Timmy card, as I don't know if this would appeal to Spikes. Pulling any two cards is much stronger than having to pull two of the SAME card, and really reduces the ability to combo.
(2.5/3) Elegance: The card is relatively simple to understand.
Development -
(1.5/3) Viability: I'm not quite sure why this card is blue, other than flavor reasons and to meet the subchallenge. I guess it somewhat fits the flavor of cloning, but that feels like a stretch since the flavor text doesn't refer to cloning. Rare is appropriate.
(1/3) Balance: I'm not sure what deck would want to slot this over Diabolic Revelation. It's two mana less if searching for two cards, but requires an extra color, so I don't know if it's competitive enough for any standard/modern/legacy/vintage deck. And obviously, this is pretty much unplayable in EDH.
Creativity -
(1/3) Uniqueness: Tutoring has been done before in black. I get where you were trying to go with it, I just don't think you got there.
(1/3) Flavor: First, I'm not a huge fan of "Random name did something at random place with random name", especially in a custom card, because we just don't have the backstory to get any sort of "ah cool" from that. Second, if she begat three identical sons... why does this only let you look for two cards? I know that limiting CMC isn't usually on my many UB cards, but maybe this could have been a riff on Collected Company instead?
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Looks fine.
(2/2) *Main Challenge: Challenge met.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Challenges met.
Total: 15.5/25
Design -
(1/3) Appeal: I'm not quite sure who this would appeal to. Johnnies, maybe? I can't imagine Spikes or Timmies getting super into it, and a UB focus on lands seems... strange, especially since Ashiok doesn't really have any mechanics that tie into lands.
(1.5/3) Elegance: That name is... just horrific. I understand trying to work the portmanteau, but it just didn't work right rolling off my tongue. (Probably tripping all over it.) The card makes sense, but I could see a player casting the spell and thinking he or she gets to order the cards off the top of their library, instead of the other person.
Development -
(2/3) Viability: So blue cards that search an opponent's library is usually to cast/steal them, and black usually exiles them. Blue has some "put cards on top of the library" cards, but the land focus still throws me.
(1/3) Balance: I'm not sure what this card is trying to do. The player gets to order the cards, so if they need land, they get to put it on top. If they need gas, they put that on top and then the land. If you could order the cards it'd be much stronger, but also more oppressive, and would require a far higher casting cost. I think this card would require far too much buildaround to be worth it. If this card was green and blue/black, and let you target yourself, it would be more useful.
Creativity -
(2/3) Uniqueness: Searching opponent's library and putting cards on top is an interesting combo; I just don't think it was effectively captured here.
(1/3) Flavor: I already talked about the card name above, and wondered why Ashiok is messing with lands. I don't know if giving someone lands is necessarily a nightmare. Maybe a card that removed X amount of lands? Not sure how I'd represent that "psychic landscape horror" that you're going for.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
(2/2) *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?
(2/2) Subchallenges: One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Total: 15.5/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Design -
(2/3) Appeal: Card advantage is always appreciated by players. Spikes would likely break it in extended formats, and in a standard that relied on top deck manipulation it would strong. The Vorthos flavor is strong... though it should only allow you to search for Islands. (Wah wah wahhhhhh.)
(2.5/3) Elegance: I think most people know what a dowsing rod is, and if not, the art direction should make it pretty clear.
Development -
(2/3) Viability: It's an artifact, and so it's hard to say it's not part of the color wheel. That said, there's precedence for this in things like Divining Top, and if used as ramp, then Journeyer's Kite. That said, most artifacts that search for cards to put into your hand sacrifice themselves. I think I would make this a rare. Crystal Ball is the same CMC, has one less activation, and scrys for 2 also. This card lets you scry for two PLUS possibly put a card into your hand.
(1.5/3) Balance: I think this would need to either be a rare, or be changed so that you can only name a non-land card, increase the activation cost, etc etc. This card would likely be used in a lot of different decks because it filters and creates card advantage, and it could probably go into a number of decks.
Creativity -
(2.5/3) Uniqueness: I like the combination of abilities along with the flavor, but I wouldn't like all the extra time the opponent used scrying.
(3/3) Flavor: The flavor comes together nicely. I like the quirkiness of making it a Dowsing Rod... other ideas such as a X-type detector would've worked too.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
(2/2) *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?
(2/2) Subchallenges: One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Total: 20.5/25
Tesco(black)lotus - 22.25
Glurman - 15.5
Tesco wins!
Ink-treader - 15.5
theazurespirit - 20.5
tehazurespirit wins!
Thanks to all for submitting cards. Glurman, Ink-treader, I just didn't know what your cards were trying to achieve. If I'm missing something, let me know. I really liked theazurespirit's card, but ultimately I think the balance of Tesco's card is stronger. I think that Dowsing Rod would be one of those cards that people discount until they play, then everyone is bemoaning it when some UR deck is taking every match to time with it.
Club Flamingo Wins: 1!
(1/3) Appeal: Johnny has Conspiracy for it, and that's about it.
(2/3) Elegance: The first ability had me scratching my head as to why I'm allowed to put the cards I looked at on top or on the bottom of that library, especially since I can name a creature type I have.
Development -
(2/3) Viability: The first ability feels too much like a blue ability.
(3/3) Balance: No problems here.
Creativity -
(3/3) Uniqueness: The first ability is new.
(3/3) Flavor: No problems here.
Polish -
(2/3) Quality: “When CARDNAME enters the battlefield...”
“... each opponent loses 1 life...”
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met.
Total: 20/25
(2/3) Appeal: Timmy might like this, as would Spike.
(3/3) Elegance: No problems here.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: No problems here.
(1/3) Balance: It may be better off as a sorcery, but the biggest issue is that you can cast cards like Ancestral Vision and Living End.
Creativity -
(1/3) Uniqueness: It's a little too close to Bring to Light.
(3/3) Flavor: No problems here.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: No problems here.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met
Total: 20/25
(2/3) Appeal: Johnny might find a combo for it. Spike might play with it.
(3/3) Elegance: No problems here.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: No problems here.
(2/3) Balance: I don't think giving face-down creatures is necessary. I think the ability to steal your opponent's cards is enough.
Creativity -
(3/3) Uniqueness: It has several new parts.
(3/3) Flavor: No problems here.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: No problems here.
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met
Total: 23/25
(1/3) Appeal: Timmy might like this.
(3/3) Elegance: No problems here.
Development -
(3/3) Viability: No problems here.
(2/3) Balance: It could have made do without the lifelink. Otherwise, this is like Griselbrand.
Creativity -
(2/3) Uniqueness: Nothing here that hasn't been done before, but it doesn't remind me of any other card.
(3/3) Flavor: No problems here.
Polish -
(1/3) Quality: So many mistakes. It should looks like this:
Flying, lifelink, haste (capitalization errors)
Pay 3 life: Put a +1/+1 counter on CARDNAME, the scry 1, then draw a card. Activate this ability only once each turn. (To scry 1, look at the top card of your library. You may put that card on the bottom of your library.) (Reminder text has to ba italicized.)
(2/2) Main Challenge: Met
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both met.
Total: 19/25
As always, no complaints.
Jimmy Groove 20+20=40
Flatline 20+19.5=39.5
thenoodler 23+23=46
sunshinesoldier 19+19=38
Tesco(black)lotus 15+22.25=37.25
glurman 21.5+15.5=37
Ink-Treader 15.5+17.5=33
theazurespirit 20.5+22.5=43
Round 4 will be up later.