Just realizing not everyone on the leaderboard is even posting cards anymore this month. So I'm not middle-of-the-pack; I'm functionally in last place with no hope of recovery. Neat!
Adapative Planning1U
Enchantment (R)
Noncreature spells you control can't be countered by spells or abilities.
Whenever a noncreature spell you control is countered by fizzling, return it to its owner's hand intsead of putting it into its owner's graveyard. "Wait! So the Ur-Dragon isn't some god-like progenitor of all dragon-kind? This is very upsetting. No matter, a quick name change and my fanfiction shall remain canon compliant! Muhahaha!"
Y'know... I've shied away from this design space, but actually, the world is ready for "fizzle" to be a game term. The reminder text for the first couple of sets afterwards could be, "A spell or ability fizzles if it is countered by the game rules instead of resolving" (or something like that). That way, this card's text could just read, "Whenever a noncreature spell you control fizzles..."
Internal InconsistencyUB
Enchantment - Aura (R)
Enchant player
Enchanted player cannot cast two spells in a row that do not share a color, unless he or she pays 2 and 3 life. (As an additional cost to cast a spell)
Crazy fun concept. I just want to make a stab an alternate wording, since "in a row" isn't currently supported in the rules.
"Enchanted player can't cast a spell that doesn't share a color with the last spell that player cast, unless he or she pays 2 and 3 life as additional costs to cast it."
Nicaetinismo: Yes, I pinched that one off in a hurry, realized what a trainwreck it was, and replaced it soon after. I might rework the concept for future designs, but this was clearly hilariously bad implementation.
For voting, I typically work off of a bar system. There's a nebulous standard in my head for what a printable card looks like, and only the cards that meet it are considered for the top 2. I take the few that do, and compare their originality, efficiency, and balance, with flavor as a tie-breaker.
The surest way to get my eyes rolling at a card is bad or ambiguous grammar, most often in the name of the card. A thesaurus can be a great tool, but you should still only use words and sentence structures that you understand. Also, I dabbled in card design in High School. Anything that resembles anything I made back then is an automatic no. There's a balance to be struck between boring design and juvenile design. A lot of the time, people seem to be way overshooting "novel" into "ridiculous" territory. Dumb flavor text is a pet peeve of mine, too, but I try not to be biased by that. My motto is, if I can't think of the perfect way to season the card with flavor text within the first 30 seconds or so, maybe it doesn't need any.
Fgurative: The going rate for vanilla land-destruction is 2R, but there's usually an upside that bumps the cost to CMC4. In this case, it's a downside, and has a much more prohibitive cost. The second choice is a far better value, and is actually undercosted. If choice #1 was "Destroy target land", and the mana cost was 2RR, I'd be totally behind this card. Ruggley: I'd totally play this card, but don't the 2 halves of fuse cards typically synergize with each other somehow? It's kind of a flavor fail, though I like the card otherwise. (But what's the rarity?) BlackTempleGuardian: Lol, Prodigal Ballista. Great concept, but 5 mana for a double-pinger that can hit players with no downsides is too good. Also, what's the rarity? netn10: Like an Orzhov From Beyond. I can dig it. Recurring it for less than its CMC might be a bit too good, and the ability cost being just black might make the whiteness of the mana cost irrelevant. Still, it goes in any white or black limited deck fairly well. ...OK, I talked myself into it. Tim1137: Know what every Vintage deck needs? 5 chances for a turn-1 Black Lotus. *softly cries* IlGreven: Pretty nifty. At worst, it eats cheap removal or forces a couple of awkward blocks, and gets better from there. You didn't specify rarity, though. I'd like it better as a 2/3 with first strike at uncommon. Like an Anaba Bodyguard with an upside. Groovelord: Idunno, man... I see this getting out of hand REALLY quickly. If it's any good at all, it'll be broken all to hell. Even the turn you play it, you get a free lightning bolt during combat. Immediate and incremental value on the same card is scary. entombedhydra: The templating of Cobble is clunky as all hell, but I do like the mechanic. CMC6 for a 4/4 with evasion and 2 upsides that synergize with each other is maybe too good for uncommon. But I like the card a lot anyway. atogstorm: The only other 2CMC "exile target creature" spell at instant is Reality Shift, and it immediately gives the opponent a replacement creature that they might be able to upgrade later. I'm thinking a clue token isn't a comparable condolence gift. However... omg flavor win. Ebontail: This could take over games really, really quickly. I think it should be a tad bit easier to kill in combat, or maybe it makes 2/2 wolves instead of copies, or maybe it's a regular death trigger. Idunno, it just seems busted as-is. Indighost: Ooh. Star Wars flavor on a simple, good card. I'm on-board. Good rarity, too. I like this at uncommon.
Sorry for the awful planeswalker yesterday. Contests just aren't fun for me unless I take it less seriously every so often.
Forestguy: I really like the Ritual mechanic. "Desolation" has historically involved mass permanent destruction, and this would have gotten my vote if it had a similar ETB ability to Desolation Giant. SnowBlack1021: Great effect, but too low-costed IMO. Groovelord: 1UUW might have worked for me, but I don't like monowhite getting extra turns. atogstorm: Great flavor and a fun, breakable effect. A bit too many moving parts for my taste, though. entombedhydra: The Johnny in me is chomping at the bit to brew around this. The Timmy in me thinks it'd be too much effort for too little payoff. StonerofKruphix*: You had me at "doesn't benefit draw-go decks." All bias aside, fantastic design. Rudyard*: I'm all-in on this card. A bomb in limited, and constructed viable in at LEAST any weenie strategy.
That definitely makes sense. It might have been smarter to err on the side of precedence. If I end up liking it enough to include in a custom set at some point, I'll probably order the cost that way after all.
Votes: Rudyard, Sagharri
Honorable Mention: Roccovsky (This is a pretty cool card, but something feels off, I can't fully place my finger on it. Might be the lopsided mana.),
Thanks for the comments. The reason I formatted the mana symbols this way, with the blue symbol first, was to emphasize that this is primarily a blue card with an optional payoff for splashing red. I don't remember any other hybrid cards with a regular mana symbol in the cost that were only two colors, so I took artistic license with this. The hybrid card frame was chosen for the same reason -- It's still just 2 colors, unlike cards like trace of abundance.
The name of the card kept changing as the design went through a few iterations. At this point, I don't even remember whether the hellhound is supposed to be be disloyal or anxious. Maybe he has multiple personality disorder, and it's both.
Get ready for some truly absurd designs >:)
Y'know... I've shied away from this design space, but actually, the world is ready for "fizzle" to be a game term. The reminder text for the first couple of sets afterwards could be, "A spell or ability fizzles if it is countered by the game rules instead of resolving" (or something like that). That way, this card's text could just read, "Whenever a noncreature spell you control fizzles..."
"Enchanted player can't cast a spell that doesn't share a color with the last spell that player cast, unless he or she pays 2 and 3 life as additional costs to cast it."
The surest way to get my eyes rolling at a card is bad or ambiguous grammar, most often in the name of the card. A thesaurus can be a great tool, but you should still only use words and sentence structures that you understand. Also, I dabbled in card design in High School. Anything that resembles anything I made back then is an automatic no. There's a balance to be struck between boring design and juvenile design. A lot of the time, people seem to be way overshooting "novel" into "ridiculous" territory. Dumb flavor text is a pet peeve of mine, too, but I try not to be biased by that. My motto is, if I can't think of the perfect way to season the card with flavor text within the first 30 seconds or so, maybe it doesn't need any.
Ruggley: I'd totally play this card, but don't the 2 halves of fuse cards typically synergize with each other somehow? It's kind of a flavor fail, though I like the card otherwise. (But what's the rarity?)
BlackTempleGuardian: Lol, Prodigal Ballista. Great concept, but 5 mana for a double-pinger that can hit players with no downsides is too good. Also, what's the rarity?
netn10: Like an Orzhov From Beyond. I can dig it. Recurring it for less than its CMC might be a bit too good, and the ability cost being just black might make the whiteness of the mana cost irrelevant. Still, it goes in any white or black limited deck fairly well. ...OK, I talked myself into it.
Tim1137: Know what every Vintage deck needs? 5 chances for a turn-1 Black Lotus. *softly cries*
IlGreven: Pretty nifty. At worst, it eats cheap removal or forces a couple of awkward blocks, and gets better from there. You didn't specify rarity, though. I'd like it better as a 2/3 with first strike at uncommon. Like an Anaba Bodyguard with an upside.
Groovelord: Idunno, man... I see this getting out of hand REALLY quickly. If it's any good at all, it'll be broken all to hell. Even the turn you play it, you get a free lightning bolt during combat. Immediate and incremental value on the same card is scary.
entombedhydra: The templating of Cobble is clunky as all hell, but I do like the mechanic. CMC6 for a 4/4 with evasion and 2 upsides that synergize with each other is maybe too good for uncommon. But I like the card a lot anyway.
atogstorm: The only other 2CMC "exile target creature" spell at instant is Reality Shift, and it immediately gives the opponent a replacement creature that they might be able to upgrade later. I'm thinking a clue token isn't a comparable condolence gift. However... omg flavor win.
Ebontail: This could take over games really, really quickly. I think it should be a tad bit easier to kill in combat, or maybe it makes 2/2 wolves instead of copies, or maybe it's a regular death trigger. Idunno, it just seems busted as-is.
Indighost: Ooh. Star Wars flavor on a simple, good card. I'm on-board. Good rarity, too. I like this at uncommon.
Sorry for the awful planeswalker yesterday. Contests just aren't fun for me unless I take it less seriously every so often.
Forestguy: I really like the Ritual mechanic. "Desolation" has historically involved mass permanent destruction, and this would have gotten my vote if it had a similar ETB ability to Desolation Giant.
SnowBlack1021: Great effect, but too low-costed IMO.
Groovelord: 1UUW might have worked for me, but I don't like monowhite getting extra turns.
atogstorm: Great flavor and a fun, breakable effect. A bit too many moving parts for my taste, though.
entombedhydra: The Johnny in me is chomping at the bit to brew around this. The Timmy in me thinks it'd be too much effort for too little payoff.
StonerofKruphix*: You had me at "doesn't benefit draw-go decks." All bias aside, fantastic design.
Rudyard*: I'm all-in on this card. A bomb in limited, and constructed viable in at LEAST any weenie strategy.
First of May (Adult language and themes)
The name of the card kept changing as the design went through a few iterations. At this point, I don't even remember whether the hellhound is supposed to be be disloyal or anxious. Maybe he has multiple personality disorder, and it's both.
Cool beans. Thanks for the reply.