Sapling Rampart3G
Sorcery (U)
Put a 0/1 green Plant creature token onto the battlefield for each land you control. "Before we reached the walls, our invasion was stopped in it's tracks by these... these weeds." Gilo, Field Commander
Return the Fallen 2WB
Instant (R)
Return up to two target creature cards with converted mana cost 2 or less from your graveyard to the battlefield. "Rise. Your services are yet required."
-Tel'Al, Orzhov Pontifex
Return X target cards with different card
types from your graveyard to the battlefield
as 2/1 green elemental creatures with 'When
this creature dies, return it to your hand.'
instead of their other abilities.
Unite the TribesRG
Sorcery (R)
Shuffle your library, then exile the top card and the bottom card. If both of the exiled cards are creature cards that share a creature type, put both of them onto the battlefield. "Though we are of different worlds, in battle we are brothers."
Hope Reborn
Sorcery (U)
Return target creature card with converted mana cost one or less from your graveyard to the battlefield.
Storm (When you cast this spell, copy it for each spell cast before it this turn.)
(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)
Assault Duo2RR
Sorcery (R)
As an additional cost to cast Assault Duo, sacrifice two creatures.
You may put up to two creature cards from your hand onto the battlefield. Those creatures gain haste until end of turn. Sacrifice them at end of turn.
Recompose3B
Sorcery (U)
Sacrifice a creature. Choose any number of target creature cards from your graveyard with total converted mana cost equal to the sacrificed creatures converted mana cost and put them onto the battlefield.
Genesis Pod2GG
Artifact - Mythic rare 3GG, Sacrifice a creature: Look at the top six cards of your library, you may put up to two creature cards from among them onto the battlefield. Put the rest on the bottom of your library in any order. Activate this ability only any time you could cast a sorcery.
Exile a card from the top of your library, a card at random from your hand, and a card at random from your graveyard in a face-down pile. Shuffle that pile and choose two cards from it. Manifest those cards.
"Be wary of your incantations. You never truly know what will spring out of the dirt until it is clawing at your ankles."
Twin Awakening1GG
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant two lands (This enchantment enters the battlefield attached to two target lands. When either of those lands leaves the battlefield, this enchantment is put into its owner's graveyard.)
Enchanted lands are 2/2 Elemental creatures and have hexproof.
Essence Vapors2B
Sorcery [R]
Manifest a card at random from your graveyard. (Put it onto the battlefield face down as a 2/2 creature. Turn it face up any time for its mana cost if it’s a creature card.)
Rebound (If you cast this spell from your hand, exile it as it resolves. At the beginning of your next upkeep, you may cast this card from exile without paying its mana cost.)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from "SALAd aka Jack Power" »
|_0|\|65407 (There; now you're fully l33t)
CCL Winner- July '08, Aug '08 Sept '08, Oct '08 Survivor- CCS: Lost in Takenuma, CCS: Stranded In Tolaria
I don't always play Jank, but when I do, I play Saffronolive.
Eternal Reflections1BWG
Enchantment (M)
At the beginning of each end step, sacrifice a creature then lose life equal to that creature's toughness. If you cannot, exile Eternal Reflections.
Whenever a creature you control dies, you may search your library for any number of creature cards with the same name as that creature. Put those cards onto the battlefield tapped, then shuffle your library.
"There is a reason why the armies of terromassa never seem to deplete."
Blazing ManifestationRR
Sorcery (Rare)
Manifest the top two cards of your library. They gain haste and "At the end of turn, if this creature is face down, exile it." In the hands of the Temur, Ugin's fire delivers life as well as death.
Metalai's Drone
Artifact (U)
: Until end of turn, Metalai's Drone becomes a 2/2 Construct artifact creature with flying and "When Metalai's Drone dies, you may search your library for a card named Metalai's Drone and put it onto the battlefield. If you do, shuffle your library.
Edit: After a bit more thought (and reading), I don't think this card meets the challenge. This is tough one. I'm seeing lots of the same ideas with different twists on them. Let's see if can think up something a bit different. Probably not.
Gaea's Rage2RG
Sorcery {R}
You may put up to two land cards from your hand onto the battlefield. They become 3/3 red and green Elemental creatures with trample and haste until end of turn. They're still lands.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A mere ten days after the Mending, a young knight of Valeron and a young ranger of Eos made a discovery that would change Alara forever.
Pardon, but my comments may be a little terse. I'd not noticed that the player deadline had passed, or that the judge deadline was approaching so fast.
Design
Appeal (X/3): Do the different player psychographics (Timmy/Johhny/Spike) have a use for the card? Does it create or fit into a deck/archetype?
Elegance (X/3): Are the concepts of the card easily understood at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
Development
Viability (X/3): 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?
Balance (X/3): 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 fun play experiences?
Creativity
Uniqueness (X/3): 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"?
Flavor (X/3): 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
Quality (X/3): Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
Main Challenge (X/2): Points deducted if the card does not meet the main challenge or only partially meets the main challenge.
Sub Challenges (X/2): One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Enrage the Land1RG
Sorcery (UC)
Target Mountain you control becomes a 4/2 red Elemental creature with trample. It's still a land.
Target Forest you control becomes a 2/4 green Elemental creature with reach. It's still a land. "Even Zendikar itself aids us against the Eldrazi."
-Nissa Revane
Design
Appeal (2/3): Do the different player psychographics (Timmy/Johhny/Spike) have a use for the card? Does it create or fit into a deck/archetype?
Spike likes the efficiency of getting two creatures for one card, not to mention the skill involved when your land base gets a little bit more complicated. Johnny might plausibly attempt to make use of cards intended to protect land to protect creatures, or vice versa, but otherwise is uninterested. Timmy doesn't care - 4/2 and 2/4 aren't big enough.
Elegance (2.5/3): Are the concepts of the card easily understood at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
No major problems here. Zendikar is waking up, the forests and the mountains, to wreak slaughter upon its enemies. However, depending on what duals are in the environment, newer players may be disappointed to learn they can't cast it unless they actually control both a mountain and a forest.
Development
Viability (3/3): 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?
Perfectly acceptable in RG, perfectly within the rules, and suited admirably to the uncommon slot.
Balance (1.5/3): 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 fun play experiences?
This is, mildly, quite pushed. Six power on the board from turn three alone is scary - that four of it tramples, and it's on two separate bodies for purposes of buffing, only makes it worse. I'd feel more comfortable with this at 4, and I wouldn't be too surprised to see it at 5.
Creativity
Uniqueness (1.5/3): 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"?
Animating lands into creatures is nothing particularly new, and these are pretty straightforward creatures for red and green. Making two different kinds of creatures is a little interesting, but there's not much that's really new here.
Flavor (2/3): 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?
The flavour here makes perfect sense, and feels professional enough, but doesn't particularly excite me.
Polish
Quality (3/3): Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
Main Challenge (2/2): Points deducted if the card does not meet the main challenge or only partially meets the main challenge.
Sub Challenges (2/2): One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Ugin's Presence 5
Enchantment [rare] 5: Manifest a card in your hand 5: Exile a facedown creature you control. If that card an instant or sorcery, you may cast it without paying its mana cost.
Design
Appeal (1/3): Do the different player psychographics (Timmy/Johhny/Spike) have a use for the card? Does it create or fit into a deck/archetype?
Johnny is bound to see some potential for fun here - seeing what cards can be manifested to cast with the second ability, and how cheaply. Timmy doesn't much care for 2/2s, but may be rather pleased with the text 'without paying its mana cost' - although the number of hoops to be jumped through may dissuade him. Spike sees nothing here - no card advantage, no high-skill plays. It does synergize with having lots of manifest, but to the best of my knowledge that's not so much a deck - even in limited, most manifest is noncreature, which is antisynergistic with itself, although this card mitigates (but does not solve) that - what if you manifest this?
Elegance (1/3): Are the concepts of the card easily understood at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
I'm not clear on why Ugin helps you cast instants and sorceries, but not enchantments or planeswalkers or artifacts. Manifesting cards from your hand is kind of odd, particularly because it costs two more than morphing, but at instant speed.
Development
Viability (2/3): 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?
The second ability feels almost more UR than colourless, but it's probably okay. This could probably be an uncommon.
Balance (1/3): 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 fun play experiences?
This feels rather weak. Manifesting creatures is usually only worthwhile for morph creatures, and you're paying two extra mana for flash there - the loss of tempo is probably not worth it. The second ability is a gimmick, which at best helps to mitigate the difficulties of manifest as a mechanic - you're still paying a lot of mana. The only way the second ability will become highly relevant is if someone manages to break it, frankly. It doesn't even seem limited playable, let alone anywhere else - maybe in Commander? But even there, the advantages tend to be marginal.
Creativity
Uniqueness (2/3): 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"?
Manifest is a recent mechanic, with mostly unexplored design space. Attacking its weaknesses is a good thought, and manifesting from hand is unusual.
Flavor (1/3): 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?
The flavour is weak and thin on the ground here - Ugin's present, but what does that actually mean?
Polish
Quality (3/3): Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
Main Challenge (2/2): Points deducted if the card does not meet the main challenge or only partially meets the main challenge.
Sub Challenges (1/2): One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Animate Equipment (Uncommon) 2U
Instant
Change the text of each Equipment you control by replacing all instances of "equipped creature" with "this creature" until end of turn. They become creatures with base power and toughness 3/3 until end of turn.
Design
Appeal (1.5/3): Do the different player psychographics (Timmy/Johhny/Spike) have a use for the card? Does it create or fit into a deck/archetype?
3/3? Timmy doesn't care all that much, although he doesn't object to getting to use all his equipment as a fighting force. Johnny sees some potential here, but the fact that the equipment all falls off, so that it acts separately, makes it somewhat less palatable. Spike is perhaps attracted to the opportunity to suddenly go wide for the win in an equipment deck, and by the sheer amount of body that can be had from playing this onto a board of small equipment.
Elegance (2.5/3): Are the concepts of the card easily understood at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
Makes a lot of sense - it does just what it says on the tin. The first sentence is a little bit funky, but overall this is great.
Development
Viability (2/3): 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?
I'm not best-comfortable with this in blue. It's true that blue gets artifact animation, but equipment is more often a white game, and this is setting up for some nasty blocks or swings out of the blue in a way that doesn't feel very blue at all. It works in blue, but I'd rather have it in white. Uncommon is the right place for this.
Balance (2.5/3): 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 fun play experiences?
This is hard to assess in both limited and standard without understanding what equipment is available. I doubt it's strong enough to see Modern play, and it's certainly not going to show up in Legacy or Vintage without a serious shift in the metagame. It might see Commander play, although the most usual equipment decks in Commander aren't blue.
Creativity
Uniqueness (2.5/3): 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"?
An obvious riff on Animate Artifact, but making equipment grant themselves their own abilities is certainly fresh, and limiting it to a single turn but making it hit your whole board helps also.
Flavor (1/3): 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?
This is essentially flavourless. Unobjectionable, but also completely uninspiring.
Polish
Quality (3/3): Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
As a note, I almost missed the rarity - I'm used to finding it on the type line.
Main Challenge (2/2): Points deducted if the card does not meet the main challenge or only partially meets the main challenge.
Sub Challenges (2/2): One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Necromantic Intervention2BR
Instant (U)
Exile up to two cards at random from your graveyard in a face-down pile, shuffle that pile, then manifest those cards. (To manifest a card, put it onto the battlefield face down as a 2/2 creature. Turn it face up any time for its mana cost if it's a creature card.)
Design
Appeal (2/3): Do the different player psychographics (Timmy/Johhny/Spike) have a use for the card? Does it create or fit into a deck/archetype?
Timmy doesn't care in the least. Spike is turned off by the randomness, although the card advantage is good. Johnny is the most intrigued here, wanting to clear his graveyard and leave some cheap things with nasty ETB triggers to dodge - six mana for two Phyrexian Dreadnoughts sounds like a good time, eh? There's not really a deck here, unless you're building around it for a combo like the above.
Elegance (2/3): Are the concepts of the card easily understood at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
This is mechanically pretty simple, although there's no real flavour to gel with - I would give you a higher score here if it were flavoured as being a desperate, grab-what-you-can thing, but that doesn't really come through.
Development
Viability (2/3): 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?
The only red here is randomness - the downside, in other words - and that's not much. I think this wants to be mono-black, or hand out haste. The deception leans blue, but it's a small enough element that I think it works. Uncommon is the right place for this.
Balance (3/3): 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 fun play experiences?
This seems pretty appropriately balanced. There's not a great deal to say here - this will be a Limited powerhouse, and may see commander play. Whether it shows up in standard is a bit harder to gauge, but my guess is probably not - the randomness is a big deal. It's not going to appear in Modern or older formats, I expect.
Creativity
Uniqueness (2/3): 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"?
Manifest from graveyard, with a Jeskai Infiltrator twist. Reasonably novel.
Flavor (1/3): 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?
There's just about no flavour here. It's a necromantic intervention, but what are you intervening in? The randomness and deception both seem to come out of nowhere, flavourwise.
Polish
Quality (3/3): Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
Main Challenge (2/2): Points deducted if the card does not meet the main challenge or only partially meets the main challenge.
Sub Challenges (2/2): One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
According to my MSE, this juuuust fits onto the card (with M15 border!):
Twisted ConscriptionUBBR
Sorcery (MR)
Each player reveals his or her hand. For each player, you may put a creature card with converted mana cost 6 or less from that player's hand onto the battlefield under your control. Those creatures gain haste until end of turn. Return them to their owners' hands at the beginning of the next end step.
Design
Appeal (2/3): Do the different player psychographics (Timmy/Johhny/Spike) have a use for the card? Does it create or fit into a deck/archetype?
Timmy loves the big beats. Johnny may try to exploit this somehow, making use of ETB triggers and bounces, but is put off by the dependence on the opponent's hand. Spike likes the efficiency of swinging with a 6-drop for four mana, but is also put off by the dependence on the opponent's hand.
Elegance (2.5/3): Are the concepts of the card easily understood at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
This is pretty straightforward, I think.
Development
Viability (2/3): 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?
It's strange to me that you centre this in black, because I really don't see the black in this at all. The blue is pretty bizarre too - I could honestly have seen this in mono-red, although probably not at CMC 4. This is definitely at least a rare, and mythic is not a problem.
Balance (2/3): 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 fun play experiences?
The potential for value here if you have any sort of sacrifice engine is significant - in standard, many finishers are CMC 6, which this can grab. Getting high-end ETB effects for four mana is also significant. The fact that this is in three colours, and heavily so at that, makes me more comfortable, but this is certainly a limited bomb if the fixing for it exists, and likely to see significant standard play. It's absurd in Commander, but thankfully not repeatably so. Unfortunately, it's likely too slow for Modern and too demanding, slow and non-decisive for Legacy, never mind Vintage. I worry that this may be pushed a little hard for standard.
Creativity
Uniqueness (2.5/3): 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"?
Dashing from your hand is obvious. Dashing from your opponent's hand is not. This is quite fresh and new.
Flavor (1/3): 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?
The flavour here is minimal, and the name would suggest sacrifice to me more than it suggests returning the creatures to hand.
Polish
Quality (3/3): Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
Main Challenge (2/2): Points deducted if the card does not meet the main challenge or only partially meets the main challenge.
Sub Challenges (2/2): One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Hordechief's Call1RW
Instant (U)
Put three 1/1 white Warrior creature tokens onto the battlefield. Raid - Sacrifice those creatures at the beginning of the next upkeep unless you attacked with a creature this turn. "An ambush must be swift and brutal, but most important, it must leave no survivors."
-Zurgo, khan of the Mardu
Design
Appeal (1.5/3): Do the different player psychographics (Timmy/Johhny/Spike) have a use for the card? Does it create or fit into a deck/archetype?
This is too small to appeal to Timmy, and lacks any interesting hooks to appeal to Johnny. Spike appreciates the decision-making between establishing board presence and holding a combat trick. This slots neatly into an aggressive token archetype.
Elegance (2/3): Are the concepts of the card easily understood at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
The hordechief calls, and warriors answer. That makes perfect sense. The raid effect is a bit less intuitive, but I suppose they only stick around if there's action going on? It works pretty well. The flavour text would suit tokens with haste or deathtouch better than vanilla tokens.
Development
Viability (3/3): 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?
No problems here. This is a solid uncommon, pretty cleanly RW, and not rules-breaking.
Balance (2.5/3): 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 fun play experiences?
This seems fairly costed, maybe even a little pushed. Many days it reads as a sorcery that puts three 1/1s in for 3, but it has options. It can also be worse if you're having trouble triggering Raid for some reason, but you shouldn't have trouble triggering Raid most of the time. Very decent in Limited, likely to see Standard play, unlikely to be relevant beyond there.
Creativity
Uniqueness (2/3): 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"?
The use of the raid drawback is the only really new thing here, but it gives a fascinating amount of new play to Raise the Alarm.
Flavor (2.5/3): 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?
This makes perfect sense as a Mardu card. The flavour is reasonably evocative.
Polish
Quality (3/3): Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
Main Challenge (2/2): Points deducted if the card does not meet the main challenge or only partially meets the main challenge.
Sub Challenges (2/2): One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Soul Reverser1BG
Artifact (M) t, Pay 1 life,Sacrifice three permanents: Reveal cards from the top of your library until you reveal two creature cards with converted mana cost less than the total converted mana cost of the sacrificed permanents. Put them onto the battlefield, then put all other cards revealed this way on the bottom of your library in a random order.
Design
Appeal (1/3): Do the different player psychographics (Timmy/Johhny/Spike) have a use for the card? Does it create or fit into a deck/archetype?
Timmy doesn't like sacrificing, and doesn't like the CMC restriction. Johnny may tailor a deck to cheat some specific things out, perhaps involving token generation or library manipulation. Spike dislikes the randomness of the effect.
Elegance (1/3): Are the concepts of the card easily understood at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
The flavour (such as it is) and mechanics don't seem to mesh particularly well. It's strange that you sacrifice permanents but find only creatures.
Development
Viability (2/3): 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?
This seems appropriately BG, but doesn't have a mythic feel - this should just be a rare.
Balance (2/3): 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 fun play experiences?
The sheer randomness, and the composition of most limited decks, and the card disadvantage, combine to mean this is unlikely to see significant limited play. Standard is not likely to have the tools to really exploit this either. No, this seems to be designed for Modern, possibly with an entire deck built around it. Unfortunately, I can't really assess what that deck would look like, or how strong it would be, so I'll be generous here out of doubt.
Creativity
Uniqueness (2/3): 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"?
This puts me to some extent in mind of Birthing Pod. It's not an effect we've seen before, although all the pieces are already in play.
Flavor (0/3): 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?
The flavour here is almost nonexistent, and the name sounds rather silly. Calling it 'Soul Reverser' would maybe make more sense if you were sacrificing only creatures.
Polish
Quality (2.5/3): Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
You're missing a space between "Pay 1 life," and "Sacrifice three permanents" in the cost of the ability. (-0.5 points.)
Main Challenge (2/2): Points deducted if the card does not meet the main challenge or only partially meets the main challenge.
Sub Challenges (2/2): One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
When Soul of Gaea enters the battlefield, you may search your library for up to two creature cards with converted mana cost two or less and put them onto the battlefield.Then shuffle your library.
When Soul of Gae leaves the battlefield, destroy all creatures you control.
"With me comes life...
and death."
Design
Appeal (1.5/3): Do the different player psychographics (Timmy/Johhny/Spike) have a use for the card? Does it create or fit into a deck/archetype?
Johnny will certainly try to exploit this. Timmy doesn't care about creatures so small, and doesn't like the drawback. Spike may make use of this, but likely finds the efficiency not worth the drawback.
Elegance (1.5/3): Are the concepts of the card easily understood at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
It's not particularly clear what the flavour here is meant to be, so it can't be said to mesh well. The effect is straightforward enough - you get some dudes, but suffer a setback if this is destroyed.
Development
Viability (3/3): 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?
This seems appropriate in green and at rare.
Balance (2/3): 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 fun play experiences?
This seems rather weak in any format with significant enchantment removal. In a format without, it's got potential, although it depends on the calibre of two-drops available - still, spending three mana for double tarmogoyf is nothing to sneeze at. Most likely to see Modern play, I would expect. It's very dubious in Limited, and Standard seldom has the 2-drops to merit so risky a play.
Creativity
Uniqueness (2/3): 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"?
The pieces all exist already, but this configuration is reasonably novel.
Flavor (1.5/3): 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?
The flavour is almost nonexistent here, unfortunately. Your flavour text is highly generic, as is your name.
Polish
Quality (2/3): Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
In the second ability, you have spelled 'Gaea' as 'Gae' (-0.5 points). The flavour text should not be split across two lines (-0.5 points).
Main Challenge (2/2): Points deducted if the card does not meet the main challenge or only partially meets the main challenge.
Sub Challenges (2/2): One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Sapling Rampart3G
Sorcery (U)
Put a 0/1 green Plant creature token onto the battlefield for each land you control. "Before we reached the walls, our invasion was stopped in it's tracks by these... these weeds." Gilo, Field Commander
Design
Appeal (1/3): Do the different player psychographics (Timmy/Johhny/Spike) have a use for the card? Does it create or fit into a deck/archetype?
Timmy doesn't care much. Johnny might use this as a ready source of tokens to sacrifice or pump. Spike isn't best-fond of purely defensive cards.
Elegance (2/3): Are the concepts of the card easily understood at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
This is pretty straightforward, but the name sounds like a wall, not a sorcery to make tokens. Perhaps "Sapling Emergence" or similar.
Development
Viability (3/3): 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?
This is suitable as a green uncommon.
Balance (2/3): 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 fun play experiences?
This is a good stall in Limited, but is not likely to happen in Standard, let alone eternal formats. It might show up in Commander, where it's a lot of tokens.
Creativity
Uniqueness (2/3): 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"?
This feels reasonably new, and I can't think of any immediate antecedents, but the pieces are all there.
Flavor (2/3): 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?
The flavour is okay, but not highly evocative.
Polish
Quality (2.5/3): Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
The attribution should be on a separate line, and preceded by a dash (-0.5 points).
Main Challenge (2/2): Points deducted if the card does not meet the main challenge or only partially meets the main challenge.
Sub Challenges (2/2): 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
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Sorcery (U)
Put a 0/1 green Plant creature token onto the battlefield for each land you control.
"Before we reached the walls, our invasion was stopped in it's tracks by these... these weeds." Gilo, Field Commander
BGStandard Green AggroGB
UWRGModern Saheeli CobraGRWU
UBRGLegacy StormGRBU
Wizards Certified Rules Advisor
Instant (R)
Return up to two target creature cards with converted mana cost 2 or less from your graveyard to the battlefield.
"Rise. Your services are yet required."
-Tel'Al, Orzhov Pontifex
Sorcery (R)
Return X target cards with different card
types from your graveyard to the battlefield
as 2/1 green elemental creatures with 'When
this creature dies, return it to your hand.'
instead of their other abilities.
Exile Rites of Awakening.
Sorcery (R)
Shuffle your library, then exile the top card and the bottom card. If both of the exiled cards are creature cards that share a creature type, put both of them onto the battlefield.
"Though we are of different worlds, in battle we are brothers."
Sorcery (U)
Return target creature card with converted mana cost one or less from your graveyard to the battlefield.
Storm (When you cast this spell, copy it for each spell cast before it this turn.)
Sorcery (R)
As an additional cost to cast Assault Duo, sacrifice two creatures.
You may put up to two creature cards from your hand onto the battlefield. Those creatures gain haste until end of turn. Sacrifice them at end of turn.
Sorcery (U)
Sacrifice a creature. Choose any number of target creature cards from your graveyard with total converted mana cost equal to the sacrificed creatures converted mana cost and put them onto the battlefield.
Artifact - Mythic rare
3GG, Sacrifice a creature: Look at the top six cards of your library, you may put up to two creature cards from among them onto the battlefield. Put the rest on the bottom of your library in any order. Activate this ability only any time you could cast a sorcery.
Sorcery [R]
Exile a card from the top of your library, a card at random from your hand, and a card at random from your graveyard in a face-down pile. Shuffle that pile and choose two cards from it. Manifest those cards.
"Be wary of your incantations. You never truly know what will spring out of the dirt until it is clawing at your ankles."
Enchantment - Aura
Enchant two lands (This enchantment enters the battlefield attached to two target lands. When either of those lands leaves the battlefield, this enchantment is put into its owner's graveyard.)
Enchanted lands are 2/2 Elemental creatures and have hexproof.
Sorcery [R]
Manifest a card at random from your graveyard. (Put it onto the battlefield face down as a 2/2 creature. Turn it face up any time for its mana cost if it’s a creature card.)
Rebound (If you cast this spell from your hand, exile it as it resolves. At the beginning of your next upkeep, you may cast this card from exile without paying its mana cost.)
CCL Winner- July '08, Aug '08 Sept '08, Oct '08
Survivor- CCS: Lost in Takenuma, CCS: Stranded In Tolaria
Enchantment (M)
At the beginning of each end step, sacrifice a creature then lose life equal to that creature's toughness. If you cannot, exile Eternal Reflections.
Whenever a creature you control dies, you may search your library for any number of creature cards with the same name as that creature. Put those cards onto the battlefield tapped, then shuffle your library.
"There is a reason why the armies of terromassa never seem to deplete."
Yes.
I'm sorry, but this does not qualify.
Sorcery {R}
You may put up to two land cards from your hand onto the battlefield. They become 3/3 red and green Elemental creatures with trample and haste until end of turn. They're still lands.
Emille, Seven-Sting Dancer Shalin Nariya
Appeal (X/3): Do the different player psychographics (Timmy/Johhny/Spike) have a use for the card? Does it create or fit into a deck/archetype?
Elegance (X/3): Are the concepts of the card easily understood at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
Development
Viability (X/3): 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?
Balance (X/3): 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 fun play experiences?
Creativity
Uniqueness (X/3): 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"?
Flavor (X/3): 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
Quality (X/3): Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
Main Challenge (X/2): Points deducted if the card does not meet the main challenge or only partially meets the main challenge.
Sub Challenges (X/2): One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Total: X/25
Appeal (2/3): Do the different player psychographics (Timmy/Johhny/Spike) have a use for the card? Does it create or fit into a deck/archetype?
Spike likes the efficiency of getting two creatures for one card, not to mention the skill involved when your land base gets a little bit more complicated. Johnny might plausibly attempt to make use of cards intended to protect land to protect creatures, or vice versa, but otherwise is uninterested. Timmy doesn't care - 4/2 and 2/4 aren't big enough.
Elegance (2.5/3): Are the concepts of the card easily understood at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
No major problems here. Zendikar is waking up, the forests and the mountains, to wreak slaughter upon its enemies. However, depending on what duals are in the environment, newer players may be disappointed to learn they can't cast it unless they actually control both a mountain and a forest.
Development
Viability (3/3): 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?
Perfectly acceptable in RG, perfectly within the rules, and suited admirably to the uncommon slot.
Balance (1.5/3): 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 fun play experiences?
This is, mildly, quite pushed. Six power on the board from turn three alone is scary - that four of it tramples, and it's on two separate bodies for purposes of buffing, only makes it worse. I'd feel more comfortable with this at 4, and I wouldn't be too surprised to see it at 5.
Creativity
Uniqueness (1.5/3): 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"?
Animating lands into creatures is nothing particularly new, and these are pretty straightforward creatures for red and green. Making two different kinds of creatures is a little interesting, but there's not much that's really new here.
Flavor (2/3): 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?
The flavour here makes perfect sense, and feels professional enough, but doesn't particularly excite me.
Polish
Quality (3/3): Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
Main Challenge (2/2): Points deducted if the card does not meet the main challenge or only partially meets the main challenge.
Sub Challenges (2/2): One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Total: 19/25
Appeal (1/3): Do the different player psychographics (Timmy/Johhny/Spike) have a use for the card? Does it create or fit into a deck/archetype?
Johnny is bound to see some potential for fun here - seeing what cards can be manifested to cast with the second ability, and how cheaply. Timmy doesn't much care for 2/2s, but may be rather pleased with the text 'without paying its mana cost' - although the number of hoops to be jumped through may dissuade him. Spike sees nothing here - no card advantage, no high-skill plays. It does synergize with having lots of manifest, but to the best of my knowledge that's not so much a deck - even in limited, most manifest is noncreature, which is antisynergistic with itself, although this card mitigates (but does not solve) that - what if you manifest this?
Elegance (1/3): Are the concepts of the card easily understood at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
I'm not clear on why Ugin helps you cast instants and sorceries, but not enchantments or planeswalkers or artifacts. Manifesting cards from your hand is kind of odd, particularly because it costs two more than morphing, but at instant speed.
Development
Viability (2/3): 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?
The second ability feels almost more UR than colourless, but it's probably okay. This could probably be an uncommon.
Balance (1/3): 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 fun play experiences?
This feels rather weak. Manifesting creatures is usually only worthwhile for morph creatures, and you're paying two extra mana for flash there - the loss of tempo is probably not worth it. The second ability is a gimmick, which at best helps to mitigate the difficulties of manifest as a mechanic - you're still paying a lot of mana. The only way the second ability will become highly relevant is if someone manages to break it, frankly. It doesn't even seem limited playable, let alone anywhere else - maybe in Commander? But even there, the advantages tend to be marginal.
Creativity
Uniqueness (2/3): 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"?
Manifest is a recent mechanic, with mostly unexplored design space. Attacking its weaknesses is a good thought, and manifesting from hand is unusual.
Flavor (1/3): 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?
The flavour is weak and thin on the ground here - Ugin's present, but what does that actually mean?
Polish
Quality (3/3): Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
Main Challenge (2/2): Points deducted if the card does not meet the main challenge or only partially meets the main challenge.
Sub Challenges (1/2): One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Total: 14/25
Appeal (1.5/3): Do the different player psychographics (Timmy/Johhny/Spike) have a use for the card? Does it create or fit into a deck/archetype?
3/3? Timmy doesn't care all that much, although he doesn't object to getting to use all his equipment as a fighting force. Johnny sees some potential here, but the fact that the equipment all falls off, so that it acts separately, makes it somewhat less palatable. Spike is perhaps attracted to the opportunity to suddenly go wide for the win in an equipment deck, and by the sheer amount of body that can be had from playing this onto a board of small equipment.
Elegance (2.5/3): Are the concepts of the card easily understood at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
Makes a lot of sense - it does just what it says on the tin. The first sentence is a little bit funky, but overall this is great.
Development
Viability (2/3): 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?
I'm not best-comfortable with this in blue. It's true that blue gets artifact animation, but equipment is more often a white game, and this is setting up for some nasty blocks or swings out of the blue in a way that doesn't feel very blue at all. It works in blue, but I'd rather have it in white. Uncommon is the right place for this.
Balance (2.5/3): 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 fun play experiences?
This is hard to assess in both limited and standard without understanding what equipment is available. I doubt it's strong enough to see Modern play, and it's certainly not going to show up in Legacy or Vintage without a serious shift in the metagame. It might see Commander play, although the most usual equipment decks in Commander aren't blue.
Creativity
Uniqueness (2.5/3): 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"?
An obvious riff on Animate Artifact, but making equipment grant themselves their own abilities is certainly fresh, and limiting it to a single turn but making it hit your whole board helps also.
Flavor (1/3): 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?
This is essentially flavourless. Unobjectionable, but also completely uninspiring.
Polish
Quality (3/3): Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
As a note, I almost missed the rarity - I'm used to finding it on the type line.
Main Challenge (2/2): Points deducted if the card does not meet the main challenge or only partially meets the main challenge.
Sub Challenges (2/2): One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Total: 19/25
Appeal (2/3): Do the different player psychographics (Timmy/Johhny/Spike) have a use for the card? Does it create or fit into a deck/archetype?
Timmy doesn't care in the least. Spike is turned off by the randomness, although the card advantage is good. Johnny is the most intrigued here, wanting to clear his graveyard and leave some cheap things with nasty ETB triggers to dodge - six mana for two Phyrexian Dreadnoughts sounds like a good time, eh? There's not really a deck here, unless you're building around it for a combo like the above.
Elegance (2/3): Are the concepts of the card easily understood at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
This is mechanically pretty simple, although there's no real flavour to gel with - I would give you a higher score here if it were flavoured as being a desperate, grab-what-you-can thing, but that doesn't really come through.
Development
Viability (2/3): 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?
The only red here is randomness - the downside, in other words - and that's not much. I think this wants to be mono-black, or hand out haste. The deception leans blue, but it's a small enough element that I think it works. Uncommon is the right place for this.
Balance (3/3): 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 fun play experiences?
This seems pretty appropriately balanced. There's not a great deal to say here - this will be a Limited powerhouse, and may see commander play. Whether it shows up in standard is a bit harder to gauge, but my guess is probably not - the randomness is a big deal. It's not going to appear in Modern or older formats, I expect.
Creativity
Uniqueness (2/3): 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"?
Manifest from graveyard, with a Jeskai Infiltrator twist. Reasonably novel.
Flavor (1/3): 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?
There's just about no flavour here. It's a necromantic intervention, but what are you intervening in? The randomness and deception both seem to come out of nowhere, flavourwise.
Polish
Quality (3/3): Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
Main Challenge (2/2): Points deducted if the card does not meet the main challenge or only partially meets the main challenge.
Sub Challenges (2/2): One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Total: 19/25
Appeal (2/3): Do the different player psychographics (Timmy/Johhny/Spike) have a use for the card? Does it create or fit into a deck/archetype?
Timmy loves the big beats. Johnny may try to exploit this somehow, making use of ETB triggers and bounces, but is put off by the dependence on the opponent's hand. Spike likes the efficiency of swinging with a 6-drop for four mana, but is also put off by the dependence on the opponent's hand.
Elegance (2.5/3): Are the concepts of the card easily understood at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
This is pretty straightforward, I think.
Development
Viability (2/3): 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?
It's strange to me that you centre this in black, because I really don't see the black in this at all. The blue is pretty bizarre too - I could honestly have seen this in mono-red, although probably not at CMC 4. This is definitely at least a rare, and mythic is not a problem.
Balance (2/3): 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 fun play experiences?
The potential for value here if you have any sort of sacrifice engine is significant - in standard, many finishers are CMC 6, which this can grab. Getting high-end ETB effects for four mana is also significant. The fact that this is in three colours, and heavily so at that, makes me more comfortable, but this is certainly a limited bomb if the fixing for it exists, and likely to see significant standard play. It's absurd in Commander, but thankfully not repeatably so. Unfortunately, it's likely too slow for Modern and too demanding, slow and non-decisive for Legacy, never mind Vintage. I worry that this may be pushed a little hard for standard.
Creativity
Uniqueness (2.5/3): 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"?
Dashing from your hand is obvious. Dashing from your opponent's hand is not. This is quite fresh and new.
Flavor (1/3): 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?
The flavour here is minimal, and the name would suggest sacrifice to me more than it suggests returning the creatures to hand.
Polish
Quality (3/3): Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
Main Challenge (2/2): Points deducted if the card does not meet the main challenge or only partially meets the main challenge.
Sub Challenges (2/2): One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Total: 19/25
Appeal (1.5/3): Do the different player psychographics (Timmy/Johhny/Spike) have a use for the card? Does it create or fit into a deck/archetype?
This is too small to appeal to Timmy, and lacks any interesting hooks to appeal to Johnny. Spike appreciates the decision-making between establishing board presence and holding a combat trick. This slots neatly into an aggressive token archetype.
Elegance (2/3): Are the concepts of the card easily understood at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
The hordechief calls, and warriors answer. That makes perfect sense. The raid effect is a bit less intuitive, but I suppose they only stick around if there's action going on? It works pretty well. The flavour text would suit tokens with haste or deathtouch better than vanilla tokens.
Development
Viability (3/3): 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?
No problems here. This is a solid uncommon, pretty cleanly RW, and not rules-breaking.
Balance (2.5/3): 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 fun play experiences?
This seems fairly costed, maybe even a little pushed. Many days it reads as a sorcery that puts three 1/1s in for 3, but it has options. It can also be worse if you're having trouble triggering Raid for some reason, but you shouldn't have trouble triggering Raid most of the time. Very decent in Limited, likely to see Standard play, unlikely to be relevant beyond there.
Creativity
Uniqueness (2/3): 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"?
The use of the raid drawback is the only really new thing here, but it gives a fascinating amount of new play to Raise the Alarm.
Flavor (2.5/3): 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?
This makes perfect sense as a Mardu card. The flavour is reasonably evocative.
Polish
Quality (3/3): Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
Main Challenge (2/2): Points deducted if the card does not meet the main challenge or only partially meets the main challenge.
Sub Challenges (2/2): One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Total: 18.5/25
Appeal (1/3): Do the different player psychographics (Timmy/Johhny/Spike) have a use for the card? Does it create or fit into a deck/archetype?
Timmy doesn't like sacrificing, and doesn't like the CMC restriction. Johnny may tailor a deck to cheat some specific things out, perhaps involving token generation or library manipulation. Spike dislikes the randomness of the effect.
Elegance (1/3): Are the concepts of the card easily understood at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
The flavour (such as it is) and mechanics don't seem to mesh particularly well. It's strange that you sacrifice permanents but find only creatures.
Development
Viability (2/3): 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?
This seems appropriately BG, but doesn't have a mythic feel - this should just be a rare.
Balance (2/3): 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 fun play experiences?
The sheer randomness, and the composition of most limited decks, and the card disadvantage, combine to mean this is unlikely to see significant limited play. Standard is not likely to have the tools to really exploit this either. No, this seems to be designed for Modern, possibly with an entire deck built around it. Unfortunately, I can't really assess what that deck would look like, or how strong it would be, so I'll be generous here out of doubt.
Creativity
Uniqueness (2/3): 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"?
This puts me to some extent in mind of Birthing Pod. It's not an effect we've seen before, although all the pieces are already in play.
Flavor (0/3): 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?
The flavour here is almost nonexistent, and the name sounds rather silly. Calling it 'Soul Reverser' would maybe make more sense if you were sacrificing only creatures.
Polish
Quality (2.5/3): Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
You're missing a space between "Pay 1 life," and "Sacrifice three permanents" in the cost of the ability. (-0.5 points.)
Main Challenge (2/2): Points deducted if the card does not meet the main challenge or only partially meets the main challenge.
Sub Challenges (2/2): One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Total: 14.5/25
Appeal (1.5/3): Do the different player psychographics (Timmy/Johhny/Spike) have a use for the card? Does it create or fit into a deck/archetype?
Johnny will certainly try to exploit this. Timmy doesn't care about creatures so small, and doesn't like the drawback. Spike may make use of this, but likely finds the efficiency not worth the drawback.
Elegance (1.5/3): Are the concepts of the card easily understood at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
It's not particularly clear what the flavour here is meant to be, so it can't be said to mesh well. The effect is straightforward enough - you get some dudes, but suffer a setback if this is destroyed.
Development
Viability (3/3): 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?
This seems appropriate in green and at rare.
Balance (2/3): 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 fun play experiences?
This seems rather weak in any format with significant enchantment removal. In a format without, it's got potential, although it depends on the calibre of two-drops available - still, spending three mana for double tarmogoyf is nothing to sneeze at. Most likely to see Modern play, I would expect. It's very dubious in Limited, and Standard seldom has the 2-drops to merit so risky a play.
Creativity
Uniqueness (2/3): 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"?
The pieces all exist already, but this configuration is reasonably novel.
Flavor (1.5/3): 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?
The flavour is almost nonexistent here, unfortunately. Your flavour text is highly generic, as is your name.
Polish
Quality (2/3): Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
In the second ability, you have spelled 'Gaea' as 'Gae' (-0.5 points). The flavour text should not be split across two lines (-0.5 points).
Main Challenge (2/2): Points deducted if the card does not meet the main challenge or only partially meets the main challenge.
Sub Challenges (2/2): One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Total: 17.5/25
Appeal (1/3): Do the different player psychographics (Timmy/Johhny/Spike) have a use for the card? Does it create or fit into a deck/archetype?
Timmy doesn't care much. Johnny might use this as a ready source of tokens to sacrifice or pump. Spike isn't best-fond of purely defensive cards.
Elegance (2/3): Are the concepts of the card easily understood at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
This is pretty straightforward, but the name sounds like a wall, not a sorcery to make tokens. Perhaps "Sapling Emergence" or similar.
Development
Viability (3/3): 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?
This is suitable as a green uncommon.
Balance (2/3): 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 fun play experiences?
This is a good stall in Limited, but is not likely to happen in Standard, let alone eternal formats. It might show up in Commander, where it's a lot of tokens.
Creativity
Uniqueness (2/3): 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"?
This feels reasonably new, and I can't think of any immediate antecedents, but the pieces are all there.
Flavor (2/3): 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?
The flavour is okay, but not highly evocative.
Polish
Quality (2.5/3): Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
The attribution should be on a separate line, and preceded by a dash (-0.5 points).
Main Challenge (2/2): Points deducted if the card does not meet the main challenge or only partially meets the main challenge.
Sub Challenges (2/2): One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Total: 18.5/25
Doomfish: 19/25
PE: 14/25
Legend: 19/25
Moss_Elemental: 19/25
thenoodler: 19/25
Ogonomany: 18.5/25
CrazyMatt: 14.5/25
Freyleyes: 17.5/25
Koopa: 18.5/25
Some judges have holder posts that they fill up when they got the judgings done.
Your judge is on the first page here: http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/creativity/custom-card-creation/custom-card-contests-and-games/604422-mcc-may-round-1-from-the-ashes?comment=2
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