Tempt with PlenitudeGGGG
Sorcery (R) Tempting offer - Draw a card for each land you control. Each opponent may draw a card for each land they control. For each opponent who does, you may put a land card from your hand onto the battlefield.
Flashback — Sacrifice four lands.
Design (2/3) Appeal: Was Edward R. Murrow more of a Johnny or a Spike? I lean towards the former, which is the target audience for this card, moreso than Timmy or Spike. The first half is a swingy combat trick against, and second half is meant to be a risk/reward gamble. (1.5/3) Elegance: I understand what the card is trying to do, though it needs some polishing on the first half due to interactions for 2HG or other team games. I don't think I've played an Emperor game for a decade, but... there is a disconnect as to why you would want to fuse the two sides, much like the two halves of this sentence.
Development (3/3) Viability: Effects on both halves are in their respective color houses, and, given the potential swingy power level of the first half, it fits at Rare. Nothing game breaking. That said... (1.5/3) Balance: "Good Night" is likely undercosted, as it's based on damage dealt, not number of attackers. "Good Luck" is questionable on many levels. Had you at least incorporated the 'double or nothing' aspect to make a more balanced Squee's Revenge, I might have seen an appeal for it. Outside of a Chance Encounter deck, I don't know why anyone would cast a X draw spell where there's a possibility of having no return for the investment.
Creativity (3/3) Uniqueness: I immediately thought of Batwing Brume when I saw the first half of this card, and utter confusion when I read the second half. I had no idea there was a card called Squee's Revenge, let alone what it did, prior to starting this crit. As it stands, it is the closest analogue I could find. I couldn't find these exact anywhere else. (3/3) Flavor: The names for each side's effect, and I am pleased that the silent 'and' between the two halves is applicable here.
Polish (1.5/3) Quality: "If damage from a source is prevented this way, that source's controller loses half that much life, rounded down, and you gain half that much life, rounded up." This adapts errata from Shadowbane to function properly if you are attacked by more than one player, and to deal with the combat damage each creature would deal individually. "Draw a card for each coin that comes up heads." Based on Ral Zarek's ultimate. (2/2) *Main Challenge: It's a Split card that can be Fused. (2/2) Subchallenges: Both sides multicolor without a shared color? Yes. No instance of 'creature'? Yes.
Total: 19.5/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Design (3/3) Appeal: I can blow up the world and/or return an artifact in my yard? Something for everyone, even if they only use one side of the card. (2.5/3) Elegance: I understand the card, although I did have to reread "Break" a few times due to my brain adding words to the sentence. I'm not psychic, but I also think the card doesn't work how you intended.
Development (2/3) Viability: RG destroying artifacts, and WUB returning them? All on point. Given Shatterstorm-type effects are Rare, this needs to be as well. "Break and Repair" sort of works for a Split card, but it doesn't flow as well as Breaking // Entering. There is one minor hiccup. When you fuse this, all targets must be chosen at the time of casting, so you won't be able to return an artifact about to be destroyed. Entering works after Breaking because you choose, not target, a creature card. (1/3) Balance: I had to reread "Break" a few times to realize I was expecting to see a phrase that was not present, which would have put it somewhere between Builder's Bane and Deadly Tempest. As written, this could end EDH games quickly due to the fact that the damage hits everyone at the table. As such, the CMC should also be higher due the cumulative mass damage aspect. "Repair" generally won't gain you an excessive amount of life, since Gleemax isn't in your deck. Well, probably not. They wouldn't... It's... it's reading this right now, isn't it?
Creativity (2.5/3) Uniqueness: I mentioned where "Break" appears to have drawn inspiration from, so it has some provenance. Sans the lifegain, "Repair" has been done a few times as a 4 CMC Sorcery. New twists on existing design space. (2/3) Flavor: Name works for each half, though, again, it doesn't flow as well as other Split cards.
Polish (3/3) Quality: Technically, I found no errors. However, I think "Break" was supposed to read "...number of artifacts they controlled...", and "Repair" was meant to start "Put an artifact card from your graveyard onto...". (2/2) *Main Challenge: It's a Split card that can be Fused. (2/2) Subchallenges: Both sides multicolor without a shared color? Yes. No instance of 'creature'? Yes.
Total: 20/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Design (1/3) Appeal: It's hard to judge the appeal of "Dismissal" as the mechanic is missing a defining phrase (see Quality). "Dejection" is also problematic, as it has a very narrow application. (1/3) Elegance: I'm fairly certain where you wanted to go with this card. However, there is a lcak of comprehension on this card that permeates all categories.
Development (0/3) Viability: There are fundamental problems with the card as written. Currently, it does not work. 'Dismissal', as mentioned, is missing text. Also, it might work better in GU than WU, given how the former is the color combination king of card draw. 'Dejection' has a similar issue, in that there is no source listed for the damage being dealt. The card also does not function as you might have intended when Fused, due to Rule 601.2a.
Quote from Comprehensive Rules »
601.2a To propose the casting of a spell, a player first moves that card (or that copy of a card) from
where it is to the stack. It becomes the topmost object on the stack. It has all the characteristics
of the card (or the copy of a card) associated with it, and that player becomes its controller. The
spell remains on the stack until it’s countered, it resolves, or an effect moves it elsewhere.
When a spell is countered, it moves from the stack to the next zone, be that the graveyard or elsewhere. It does not move from the hand, so there is a disconnect between the two halves of the card. (1/3) Balance: As intended, it would be an interesting toolbox option.
Creativity (1/3) Uniqueness: The curveball you were trying to throw with the counterspell is a new tact, and the punisher damage spell is a nice touch. Together, though, it's a long way for "Counter target spell. If that spell is countered this way, ~ deals 4 damage to that spell's controller." (2.5/3) Flavor: I enjoy the names. "Dismissal and Dejection" works better than others for a Split card.
Polish (1/3) Quality: "...pays X, where X is equal to the difference in cards {in hands? in libraries? in graveyards?} between you...". "If a card was put into target opponent's graveyard from their hand this turn, Dejection deals 4 damage to that player." At Uncommon, this should only affect one player. At Rare, and a higher CMC, it could be rewritten for all opponents. (2/2) *Main Challenge: It's a Split card that can be Fused. (2/2) Subchallenges: Both sides multicolor without a shared color? Yes. No instance of 'creature'? Yes.
Total: DQ/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Design (2/3) Appeal: Surveil with a lifegain kicker. WUx Control (Spike) and BGx Dredge (Johnny) would likely find a fast home for this. Timmy might fall down a well, though. (3/3) Elegance: Clear as triple distilled vodka.
Development (3/3) Viability: Surveil in UB. Lifegain in GW. Uncommon for complexity. And it works as intended when Fused. (3/3) Balance: Making this a Sorcery lessens its potential, and balances the card. It can help recover and stabilize in the mid to late game.
Creativity (2.5/3) Uniqueness: Simple ideas, combined in a new fashion. (2.5/3) Flavor: "Knowledge and Wisdom" works great as a Split card name. I would have inverted them here. Wisdom for the Surviel (as you may want to toss some of the stack in the yard), and Knowledge for the reveal (everyone will know).
Polish (3/3) Quality: No issues found. (2/2) *Main Challenge: It's a Split card that can be Fused. (2/2) Subchallenges: Both sides multicolor without a shared color? Yes. No instance of 'creature'? Yes.
Total: 23/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Design (2/3) Appeal: I don't know many Spikes that play these types of combat tricks outside of Limited environments. (3/3) Elegance: It's so easy, it's almost like I've seen these cards before.
Is the card easily understandable at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
Development (0.5/3) Viability: The effects for 'Over' are very much in the WU wheelhouse. The effect for 'Out' is in the RW wheelhouse, where the colors of Boros care if a creature is attacking, blocking, or tapped. Also, there is no Rarity here, but this would likely be an Uncommon. In addition, when Fused, you would not be able to Bolt the same creature you intend to tap, as it would be an illegal target at casting. (3/3) Balance: Nothing broken here.
Creativity (0/3) Uniqueness: 'Over' is a straight copy of the left half of Depose // Deploy. 'Out' has the exact same effect as Summary Judgment. Nothing is unique about this card. (2/3) Flavor: "Over and Out" is a fine Split card name (somewhat surprised it hasn't been used yet). However, 'Out' would be more fitting for a card that exiles, not just damages.
Polish (3/3) Quality: You transcribed two cards. (2/2) *Main Challenge: It's a Split card that can be Fused. (1/2) Subchallenges: Both sides multicolor without a shared color? Yes. No instance of 'creature'? No.
Total: 16.5/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Design (2/3) Appeal: Theft and global sac on the same card? Timmy sad. Mean kids play this card. (3/3) Elegance: Nothing about this card is difficult to understand.
Development (3/3) Viability: On color for both effects, and at Rare, they make sense.
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? (1/3) Balance: Both sides of this card are undercosted. Entrancing Melody can only target creatures, and needs 4 mana to steal a 2-drop. Archmage's Charm costs UUU and can only snag a 0- or 1-drop. 'Command' should be 2UB. The global Culling Scales one-shot effect should also cost 1 more at the minimum.
Creativity (0.5/3) Uniqueness:Conquer already exists. As does Catch // Release, which costs 9 mana when Fused, and is a Sorcery to minimize possible shenanigans. Wait, that's a card now. To minimize possible chicanery? There we are. The effect of Release is wider than 'Conquer', but they both operate in the same sphere here. (1/3) Flavor: The phrase "Command and Conquer" has me expecting to see a poorly acted FMV after this card is played. While the phrase is excellent for a Split card, having a sacrifice effect on a card named 'Conquer' does not synch.
Polish (2.5/3) Quality: "Instanr"? "...that player chooses one of them." See Drop of Honey.
Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating. (2/2) *Main Challenge: It's a Split card that can be Fused. (2/2) Subchallenges: Both sides multicolor without a shared color? Yes. No instance of 'creature'? Yes.
Total: 17/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Jimmy Groove: I don't think all those types are going to fit. Also, why does the name change to Grod? Given the potential high risk involved with his ETB trigger to be "granted" the power, I think Demon might be a more appropriate Race for the card.
LnGrrrR: These should be two distinct abilities. One with wording like Greater Gargadon, and the other like Bloodbriar. Odd rules things happen when you sacrifice a creature to put a +1/+1 on itself.
IcariiFA: Only Planeswalkers use gender pronouns. "...remove a time counter for each 1 life you lost." (See Lich's Tomb.) The trigger that adds +1/+1 counters should be listed separately, as it's a static ability that is active only when Jazine is a permanent.
Algernone25: We went a similar route. As a creature, this is a little bland being french vanilla. The payoff comes in the cast from exile. I might have lowered the Suspend count to 2 for the Demonic Tutor effect, as this needs help to go off on Turn 6 as written.
void_nothing: So... many... words. Turning all your lands into Ancient Tombs makes me wonder how the Mirror Universe will be implemented as part of the set this gets printed in. I can also see a rise of Turbo Suicide Simic EDH decks being built with this as the General, given the mass acceleration it creates.
Hemlock: There's a typo in the name. It should read 'Endless Perks'. A reliable, repeatable CMC 3 with Cascade would cause some warping in Legacy. Not to mention the built in "dodge" mechanic that helps avoid removal of all types.
Top 3
3. Jimmy Groove
2. void_nothing
1. Algernone25
Everted Valley
Plane - Yharik
Nonland cards each player owns have flash.
Players can’t cast spells during their turn. : Whenever you roll , you may cast spells until end of turn. Opponents can't cast spells until the beginning of the next upkeep.
Challenge: Create a spell with both flashback and one of the following mechanics introduced in the Commander series. Stay within the color identity of your Round 1 card.
join forces
tempting offer
lieutenant
experience
myriad
undaunted
I know there is a workaround in having the spell generate a token(s) that could use lieutenant, experience, or myriad, but would that really fall in line with the challenge of creating a card with flashback and one of the aforementioned ability words?
kwanyeegor - Holy Microtext, Batman! There is a quite a bit of missing punctuation, but, even so, this much rules text with five different lines of abilities would end up needing a magnifying glass much like Animate Dead. 87 Drakes in the game, only 13 of which aren't at least partially Blue, yet you went with URR in the casting cost. It seems like it was balanced on the wrong side there.
Fajen Thygia - There are a number of templating problems with the card, but I get the basic idea. Not seeing the need for 'Tribal' to be added to the card since it was effectively retired. While I am a fan of punisher mechanics, this looks like it would be part of a new category: masochist mechanics. There is almost never going to be a good outcome from letting your opponent name three colors and you getting to add one of the three to your mana pool.
Hemlock - I think I would be a Saga Aura. This would also be disgusting if attached to a creature that had an ETB proliferate ability. Thankfully, there aren't any creatures thatcouldabuse such an Aura.
well, somebody could make a new Club Flamingo thread on the new site.
To be clear I'm referring to myself there.
I wasn't expecting to have to make a new post so soon after the last one, but I guess my hand was forced.
When the time comes and the new site is up I'll make a new Club Flamingo there, as well as providing one final retrospective post here. End of an era indeed, but just like last time it'll rise again.
The question being, what form will the new CF take? Will it be the devil-may-care current contests we have, or will it revert to its initial state, much like a resurrectedTranscendent Master (ten entries per challenge, rubric scoring for judgments)?
I'm all for giving RaikouRider until midnight tonight to submit an entry. We could then start crits and Top 3 tomorrow, due by the end of the day on Saturday the 8th of June. Any objections?
Design (2/3) Appeal: Primarily a combo piece due to its resource hogging. Due to its inability to win the game on its own, Spikes are less likely to take an interest. (2/3) Elegance: It's understandable, but due to the ability to stack the triggers, you have to know which way to order them each turn to take full advantage of the card.
Development (2/3) Viability: The effect of the card in White is something we haven't really seen since Alliances, and, even then, it was only as a color hoser. However, given that this card has a color identity of WB, the ability is more in line. Outside of the challenge, I think it would work better with a casting cost and a cumulative upkeep. Rarity is on point. (2/3) Balance: This would be difficult to utilize in Limited with the color requirements, but I don't know if it could find a home in any Constructed environments. Again, the fact that you can stack the triggers to get a "free" use without paying the cumulative upkeep after the first time does increase its effectiveness.
Creativity (2.5/3) Uniqueness: This reminded me of Armageddon Clock, a card older than many of the people playing M:tG. 'Compund Interest' allows the damage to be directed anywhere, but the ratcheting up to "how high will it go" adds some nostalgia feels for me. (2/3) Flavor: The name is solid, but the flavor text is a little stale. Orzhov loans were notorious for bleeding you dry (sometimes literally). The terms made Lili's contracts seem fair.
Polish (2.75/3) Quality: "...on it. You gain life equal to the damage dealt this way." (2/2) *Main Challenge: Cumulative upkeep present. (2/2) Subchallenges: Not a creature? Yes. CU of a color not found in mana cost? Yes.
Total: 19.25/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Design (2/3) Appeal: I don't see much Spike potential in this. (2.5/3) Elegance: It's a little clunky as written, but the ideas for the mechanics come across.
Development (2.5/3) Viability: It makes tokens and/or pumps a tribe, both of which are very Red and Green abilities. I'm not sure this couldn't be downgraded to Uncommon given the lackluster power level. (2.5/3) Balance: I have two gripes with the card in this area. The tokens don't have haste, and the Green pump isn't +1/+1. Change the tokens to Berserkers (for flavor) and this suddenly becomes a mana sink that can close out games. As is, it's actually underpowered for anywhere outside Limited, and, even then, it doesn't hit that bomb Rare level.
Creativity (2/3) Uniqueness: This hits an interesting cross section between Jötun Owl Keeper and Balduvian Fallen (below). Much like Assemble the Legion, it can build over several turns. Unlike Assemble, it takes an ever increasing investment to do so. (1.5/3) Flavor: With a name like 'The Bloodhall', flavor text would have enhanced. The "blood" aspect is lacking here that we would often associate with Black or some interaction with life.
Polish (2/3) Quality: "...create a 1/1 Red Warrior creature token for each spent this way, then Warrior creatures you control get +1/+0 until end of turn for each spent this way." See Balduvian Fallen. (2/2) *Main Challenge: Cumulative upkeep present. (2/2) Subchallenges: Not a creature? Yes. CU of a color not found in mana cost? Yes.
Total: 19/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Design (2/3) Appeal: It's a land that fetches other (basic) lands, provided you have the requisite Green mana. Timmy has a headache. (3/3) Elegance: No problems understanding what the card does.
Development (1.5/3) Viability: There have only been four Mythic lands printed since that rarity came to be (not counting upshifts), and one of them starts out as an artifact. 'Garden of the Ancients' would be on a similar level to Eye of Ugin, if it did a little more. This can easily drop to Rare. (1/3) Balance: This can be a build around card, but, unlike Eye of Ugin, it has no effect on the early game. This has the same level of uselessness as a Reflecting Pool on Turn 1. To a degree, it's more akin to Search for Tomorrow if played on Turn 2. Most times, though, I'd rather just have a Terramorphic Expanse.
Creativity (2.5/3) Uniqueness: Cumulative upkeep with land fetch? That's a new twist.
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”? (2.5/3) Flavor: The name and flavor text are making me wonder where on Pandora to find this garden.
Polish (3/3) Quality: No issues found. (2/2) *Main Challenge: Cumulative upkeep present. (2/2) Subchallenges: Not a creature? Yes. CU of a color not found in mana cost? Yes.
Total: 20.5/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Design (2/3) Appeal: Timmy sees a big Demon, but is confused about how to best use it. (2.5/3) Elegance: This has minor complexity, but you can tell what the card is designed to do.
Development (3/3) Viability: It works in the colors of Rakdos, and Daxos's Torment reminds us that this opalescence ability isn't reserved to White and Blue. Rare is a good level for this. (2/3) Balance: 'Lurking Darkness' won't reshape any formats, but it is a decent build-around type of effect. Worse in Limited, as board states normally don't remain empty very long.
Creativity (2/3) Uniqueness: Enchantments becoming creatures has been a thing since Urza's Block. The fact that this also has a scaling Pyrohemia effect blended in adds some variety to its applications. (1.5/3) Flavor: The name fits very well for the Demon appearing when no one else is around, but is disconnected from the damage each upkeep.
Polish (2.5/3) Quality: "Lurking Darkness is a 6/6 Demon creature with flying as long as there are no other creatures on the battlefield." See Rusted Relic. Unlike the Theros Gods or Arix, you are adding a type and qualities once a condition is met, not suppressing ones already present. "Whenever you pay Lurking Darkness's cumulative upkeep, it deals..." (2/2) *Main Challenge: Cumulative upkeep present. (2/2) Subchallenges: Not a creature? Yes. CU of a color not found in mana cost? Yes.
Total: 19.5/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Final Scores
bravelion83: 19.25
mirrodin71: 19
Freyleyes: 20.5
Flatline: 19.5
@Mergatroid_Jones: I wanted something a little more entertaining and amusing than just an enchantment/artifact that reads "Land cards you control have cycling 2."
Original Mythological characters? Could we get a little more of a descriptor for that?
MTG Salvation is going into Read-Only mode on the 8th of July, not June. There's still weeks to go. Why else would the CCL and MCC be run if there wasn't a full month to complete them?
Excavate2
Instant (U)
Draw a card.
Retrace (You may cast this card from your graveyard by discarding a land card in addition to paying its other costs.)
IIW: The original Club Flamingo challenge - Make a mass removal card.
Welcome to the Final MCC for MTG Salvation. Due to the desire to make sure this contest concludes before the site is archived into read-only mode, there will only be three rounds. Contestants will have five days to design, and judges will be given four days to complete scoring. With that stated, let's begin the send off for this site that has entertained and informed this community for more than a decade.
Round 1 Challenge: Design a split card with Fuse.
Subchallenge 1: Both sides are multicolor, but neither side share any colors. Subchallenge 2: The word creature does not appear anywhere on the card.
As needed.
Design Deadline is the 5th of June, 2019 at 23:59 EDT.
Judging Deadline is the 9th of June, 2019 at 23:59 EDT.
Design (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: /25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Sorcery (R)
Tempting offer - Draw a card for each land you control. Each opponent may draw a card for each land they control. For each opponent who does, you may put a land card from your hand onto the battlefield.
Flashback — Sacrifice four lands.
Design
(2/3) Appeal: Was Edward R. Murrow more of a Johnny or a Spike? I lean towards the former, which is the target audience for this card, moreso than Timmy or Spike. The first half is a swingy combat trick against, and second half is meant to be a risk/reward gamble.
(1.5/3) Elegance: I understand what the card is trying to do, though it needs some polishing on the first half due to interactions for 2HG or other team games. I don't think I've played an Emperor game for a decade, but... there is a disconnect as to why you would want to fuse the two sides, much like the two halves of this sentence.
Development
(3/3) Viability: Effects on both halves are in their respective color houses, and, given the potential swingy power level of the first half, it fits at Rare. Nothing game breaking. That said...
(1.5/3) Balance: "Good Night" is likely undercosted, as it's based on damage dealt, not number of attackers. "Good Luck" is questionable on many levels. Had you at least incorporated the 'double or nothing' aspect to make a more balanced Squee's Revenge, I might have seen an appeal for it. Outside of a Chance Encounter deck, I don't know why anyone would cast a X draw spell where there's a possibility of having no return for the investment.
Creativity
(3/3) Uniqueness: I immediately thought of Batwing Brume when I saw the first half of this card, and utter confusion when I read the second half. I had no idea there was a card called Squee's Revenge, let alone what it did, prior to starting this crit. As it stands, it is the closest analogue I could find. I couldn't find these exact anywhere else.
(3/3) Flavor: The names for each side's effect, and I am pleased that the silent 'and' between the two halves is applicable here.
Polish
(1.5/3) Quality: "If damage from a source is prevented this way, that source's controller loses half that much life, rounded down, and you gain half that much life, rounded up." This adapts errata from Shadowbane to function properly if you are attacked by more than one player, and to deal with the combat damage each creature would deal individually. "Draw a card for each coin that comes up heads." Based on Ral Zarek's ultimate.
(2/2) *Main Challenge: It's a Split card that can be Fused.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both sides multicolor without a shared color? Yes. No instance of 'creature'? Yes.
Total: 19.5/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Design
(3/3) Appeal: I can blow up the world and/or return an artifact in my yard? Something for everyone, even if they only use one side of the card.
(2.5/3) Elegance: I understand the card, although I did have to reread "Break" a few times due to my brain adding words to the sentence. I'm not psychic, but I also think the card doesn't work how you intended.
Development
(2/3) Viability: RG destroying artifacts, and WUB returning them? All on point. Given Shatterstorm-type effects are Rare, this needs to be as well. "Break and Repair" sort of works for a Split card, but it doesn't flow as well as Breaking // Entering. There is one minor hiccup. When you fuse this, all targets must be chosen at the time of casting, so you won't be able to return an artifact about to be destroyed. Entering works after Breaking because you choose, not target, a creature card.
(1/3) Balance: I had to reread "Break" a few times to realize I was expecting to see a phrase that was not present, which would have put it somewhere between Builder's Bane and Deadly Tempest. As written, this could end EDH games quickly due to the fact that the damage hits everyone at the table. As such, the CMC should also be higher due the cumulative mass damage aspect. "Repair" generally won't gain you an excessive amount of life, since Gleemax isn't in your deck. Well, probably not. They wouldn't... It's... it's reading this right now, isn't it?
Creativity
(2.5/3) Uniqueness: I mentioned where "Break" appears to have drawn inspiration from, so it has some provenance. Sans the lifegain, "Repair" has been done a few times as a 4 CMC Sorcery. New twists on existing design space.
(2/3) Flavor: Name works for each half, though, again, it doesn't flow as well as other Split cards.
Polish
(3/3) Quality: Technically, I found no errors. However, I think "Break" was supposed to read "...number of artifacts they controlled...", and "Repair" was meant to start "Put an artifact card from your graveyard onto...".
(2/2) *Main Challenge: It's a Split card that can be Fused.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both sides multicolor without a shared color? Yes. No instance of 'creature'? Yes.
Total: 20/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Design
(1/3) Appeal: It's hard to judge the appeal of "Dismissal" as the mechanic is missing a defining phrase (see Quality). "Dejection" is also problematic, as it has a very narrow application.
(1/3) Elegance: I'm fairly certain where you wanted to go with this card. However, there is a lcak of comprehension on this card that permeates all categories.
Development
(0/3) Viability: There are fundamental problems with the card as written. Currently, it does not work. 'Dismissal', as mentioned, is missing text. Also, it might work better in GU than WU, given how the former is the color combination king of card draw. 'Dejection' has a similar issue, in that there is no source listed for the damage being dealt. The card also does not function as you might have intended when Fused, due to Rule 601.2a.
When a spell is countered, it moves from the stack to the next zone, be that the graveyard or elsewhere. It does not move from the hand, so there is a disconnect between the two halves of the card.
(1/3) Balance: As intended, it would be an interesting toolbox option.
Creativity
(1/3) Uniqueness: The curveball you were trying to throw with the counterspell is a new tact, and the punisher damage spell is a nice touch. Together, though, it's a long way for "Counter target spell. If that spell is countered this way, ~ deals 4 damage to that spell's controller."
(2.5/3) Flavor: I enjoy the names. "Dismissal and Dejection" works better than others for a Split card.
Polish
(1/3) Quality: "...pays X, where X is equal to the difference in cards {in hands? in libraries? in graveyards?} between you...". "If a card was put into target opponent's graveyard from their hand this turn, Dejection deals 4 damage to that player." At Uncommon, this should only affect one player. At Rare, and a higher CMC, it could be rewritten for all opponents.
(2/2) *Main Challenge: It's a Split card that can be Fused.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both sides multicolor without a shared color? Yes. No instance of 'creature'? Yes.
Total: DQ/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Design
(2/3) Appeal: Surveil with a lifegain kicker. WUx Control (Spike) and BGx Dredge (Johnny) would likely find a fast home for this. Timmy might fall down a well, though.
(3/3) Elegance: Clear as triple distilled vodka.
Development
(3/3) Viability: Surveil in UB. Lifegain in GW. Uncommon for complexity. And it works as intended when Fused.
(3/3) Balance: Making this a Sorcery lessens its potential, and balances the card. It can help recover and stabilize in the mid to late game.
Creativity
(2.5/3) Uniqueness: Simple ideas, combined in a new fashion.
(2.5/3) Flavor: "Knowledge and Wisdom" works great as a Split card name. I would have inverted them here. Wisdom for the Surviel (as you may want to toss some of the stack in the yard), and Knowledge for the reveal (everyone will know).
Polish
(3/3) Quality: No issues found.
(2/2) *Main Challenge: It's a Split card that can be Fused.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both sides multicolor without a shared color? Yes. No instance of 'creature'? Yes.
Total: 23/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Design
(2/3) Appeal: I don't know many Spikes that play these types of combat tricks outside of Limited environments.
(3/3) Elegance: It's so easy, it's almost like I've seen these cards before.
Is the card easily understandable at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
Development
(0.5/3) Viability: The effects for 'Over' are very much in the WU wheelhouse. The effect for 'Out' is in the RW wheelhouse, where the colors of Boros care if a creature is attacking, blocking, or tapped. Also, there is no Rarity here, but this would likely be an Uncommon. In addition, when Fused, you would not be able to Bolt the same creature you intend to tap, as it would be an illegal target at casting.
(3/3) Balance: Nothing broken here.
Creativity
(0/3) Uniqueness: 'Over' is a straight copy of the left half of Depose // Deploy. 'Out' has the exact same effect as Summary Judgment. Nothing is unique about this card.
(2/3) Flavor: "Over and Out" is a fine Split card name (somewhat surprised it hasn't been used yet). However, 'Out' would be more fitting for a card that exiles, not just damages.
Polish
(3/3) Quality: You transcribed two cards.
(2/2) *Main Challenge: It's a Split card that can be Fused.
(1/2) Subchallenges: Both sides multicolor without a shared color? Yes. No instance of 'creature'? No.
Total: 16.5/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Design
(2/3) Appeal: Theft and global sac on the same card? Timmy sad. Mean kids play this card.
(3/3) Elegance: Nothing about this card is difficult to understand.
Development
(3/3) Viability: On color for both effects, and at Rare, they make sense.
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?
(1/3) Balance: Both sides of this card are undercosted. Entrancing Melody can only target creatures, and needs 4 mana to steal a 2-drop. Archmage's Charm costs UUU and can only snag a 0- or 1-drop. 'Command' should be 2UB. The global Culling Scales one-shot effect should also cost 1 more at the minimum.
Creativity
(0.5/3) Uniqueness: Conquer already exists. As does Catch // Release, which costs 9 mana when Fused, and is a Sorcery to minimize possible shenanigans. Wait, that's a card now. To minimize possible chicanery? There we are. The effect of Release is wider than 'Conquer', but they both operate in the same sphere here.
(1/3) Flavor: The phrase "Command and Conquer" has me expecting to see a poorly acted FMV after this card is played. While the phrase is excellent for a Split card, having a sacrifice effect on a card named 'Conquer' does not synch.
Polish
(2.5/3) Quality: "Instanr"? "...that player chooses one of them." See Drop of Honey.
Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
(2/2) *Main Challenge: It's a Split card that can be Fused.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Both sides multicolor without a shared color? Yes. No instance of 'creature'? Yes.
Total: 17/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Scores
Algernone25: 19.5/25
Artorias: 20/25
BlackWaltz3: DQ/25 (Non-viable card)
bravelion83: 23/25
Flatline: 16.5/25
Freyleyes: 17/25
Jimmy Groove: I don't think all those types are going to fit. Also, why does the name change to Grod?
LnGrrrR: These should be two distinct abilities. One with wording like Greater Gargadon, and the other like Bloodbriar. Odd rules things happen when you sacrifice a creature to put a +1/+1 on itself.
IcariiFA: Only Planeswalkers use gender pronouns. "...remove a time counter for each 1 life you lost." (See Lich's Tomb.) The trigger that adds +1/+1 counters should be listed separately, as it's a static ability that is active only when Jazine is a permanent.
Algernone25: We went a similar route. As a creature, this is a little bland being french vanilla. The payoff comes in the cast from exile. I might have lowered the Suspend count to 2 for the Demonic Tutor effect, as this needs help to go off on Turn 6 as written.
void_nothing: So... many... words. Turning all your lands into Ancient Tombs makes me wonder how the Mirror Universe will be implemented as part of the set this gets printed in. I can also see a rise of Turbo Suicide Simic EDH decks being built with this as the General, given the mass acceleration it creates.
Hemlock: There's a typo in the name. It should read 'Endless Perks'. A reliable, repeatable CMC 3 with Cascade would cause some warping in Legacy. Not to mention the built in "dodge" mechanic that helps avoid removal of all types.
Top 3
3. Jimmy Groove
2. void_nothing
1. Algernone25
Plane - Yharik
Nonland cards each player owns have flash.
Players can’t cast spells during their turn.
IIW: Better-than-a-basic Lands.
I know there is a workaround in having the spell generate a token(s) that could use lieutenant, experience, or myriad, but would that really fall in line with the challenge of creating a card with flashback and one of the aforementioned ability words?
kwanyeegor - Holy Microtext, Batman! There is a quite a bit of missing punctuation, but, even so, this much rules text with five different lines of abilities would end up needing a magnifying glass much like Animate Dead. 87 Drakes in the game, only 13 of which aren't at least partially Blue, yet you went with URR in the casting cost. It seems like it was balanced on the wrong side there.
Fajen Thygia - There are a number of templating problems with the card, but I get the basic idea. Not seeing the need for 'Tribal' to be added to the card since it was effectively retired. While I am a fan of punisher mechanics, this looks like it would be part of a new category: masochist mechanics. There is almost never going to be a good outcome from letting your opponent name three colors and you getting to add one of the three to your mana pool.
Hemlock - I think I would be a Saga Aura. This would also be disgusting if attached to a creature that had an ETB proliferate ability. Thankfully, there aren't any creatures that could abuse such an Aura.
Top 3
3. Fajen Thygia
2. kwanyeegor
1. Hemlock
Honorable Mention: void_nothing
Judge Assignments
Eventide Sojourner
Algernone25
Artorias
BlackWaltz3
bravelion83
Flatline
Freyleyes
void_nothing
Hemlock
IcariiFA
Jimmy Groove
kwanyeegor
mirrodin71
The_Hittite
Mr. Rithaniel
netn10
StonerOfKruphix
Subject16
TotallyHaywire
The players with the three highest scores from each group will advance to the second Round.
The question being, what form will the new CF take? Will it be the devil-may-care current contests we have, or will it revert to its initial state, much like a resurrected Transcendent Master (ten entries per challenge, rubric scoring for judgments)?
Design
(2/3) Appeal: Primarily a combo piece due to its resource hogging. Due to its inability to win the game on its own, Spikes are less likely to take an interest.
(2/3) Elegance: It's understandable, but due to the ability to stack the triggers, you have to know which way to order them each turn to take full advantage of the card.
Development
(2/3) Viability: The effect of the card in White is something we haven't really seen since Alliances, and, even then, it was only as a color hoser. However, given that this card has a color identity of WB, the ability is more in line. Outside of the challenge, I think it would work better with a
(2/3) Balance: This would be difficult to utilize in Limited with the color requirements, but I don't know if it could find a home in any Constructed environments. Again, the fact that you can stack the triggers to get a "free" use without paying the cumulative upkeep after the first time does increase its effectiveness.
Creativity
(2.5/3) Uniqueness: This reminded me of Armageddon Clock, a card older than many of the people playing M:tG. 'Compund Interest' allows the damage to be directed anywhere, but the ratcheting up to "how high will it go" adds some nostalgia feels for me.
(2/3) Flavor: The name is solid, but the flavor text is a little stale. Orzhov loans were notorious for bleeding you dry (sometimes literally). The terms made Lili's contracts seem fair.
Polish
(2.75/3) Quality: "...on it. You gain life equal to the damage dealt this way."
(2/2) *Main Challenge: Cumulative upkeep present.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Not a creature? Yes. CU of a color not found in mana cost? Yes.
Total: 19.25/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Design
(2/3) Appeal: I don't see much Spike potential in this.
(2.5/3) Elegance: It's a little clunky as written, but the ideas for the mechanics come across.
Development
(2.5/3) Viability: It makes tokens and/or pumps a tribe, both of which are very Red and Green abilities. I'm not sure this couldn't be downgraded to Uncommon given the lackluster power level.
(2.5/3) Balance: I have two gripes with the card in this area. The tokens don't have haste, and the Green pump isn't +1/+1. Change the tokens to Berserkers (for flavor) and this suddenly becomes a mana sink that can close out games. As is, it's actually underpowered for anywhere outside Limited, and, even then, it doesn't hit that bomb Rare level.
Creativity
(2/3) Uniqueness: This hits an interesting cross section between Jötun Owl Keeper and Balduvian Fallen (below). Much like Assemble the Legion, it can build over several turns. Unlike Assemble, it takes an ever increasing investment to do so.
(1.5/3) Flavor: With a name like 'The Bloodhall', flavor text would have enhanced. The "blood" aspect is lacking here that we would often associate with Black or some interaction with life.
Polish
(2/3) Quality: "...create a 1/1 Red Warrior creature token for each
(2/2) *Main Challenge: Cumulative upkeep present.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Not a creature? Yes. CU of a color not found in mana cost? Yes.
Total: 19/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Design
(2/3) Appeal: It's a land that fetches other (basic) lands, provided you have the requisite Green mana. Timmy has a headache.
(3/3) Elegance: No problems understanding what the card does.
Development
(1.5/3) Viability: There have only been four Mythic lands printed since that rarity came to be (not counting upshifts), and one of them starts out as an artifact. 'Garden of the Ancients' would be on a similar level to Eye of Ugin, if it did a little more. This can easily drop to Rare.
(1/3) Balance: This can be a build around card, but, unlike Eye of Ugin, it has no effect on the early game. This has the same level of uselessness as a Reflecting Pool on Turn 1. To a degree, it's more akin to Search for Tomorrow if played on Turn 2. Most times, though, I'd rather just have a Terramorphic Expanse.
Creativity
(2.5/3) Uniqueness: Cumulative upkeep with land fetch? That's a new twist.
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”?
(2.5/3) Flavor: The name and flavor text are making me wonder where on Pandora to find this garden.
Polish
(3/3) Quality: No issues found.
(2/2) *Main Challenge: Cumulative upkeep present.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Not a creature? Yes. CU of a color not found in mana cost? Yes.
Total: 20.5/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Design
(2/3) Appeal: Timmy sees a big Demon, but is confused about how to best use it.
(2.5/3) Elegance: This has minor complexity, but you can tell what the card is designed to do.
Development
(3/3) Viability: It works in the colors of Rakdos, and Daxos's Torment reminds us that this opalescence ability isn't reserved to White and Blue. Rare is a good level for this.
(2/3) Balance: 'Lurking Darkness' won't reshape any formats, but it is a decent build-around type of effect. Worse in Limited, as board states normally don't remain empty very long.
Creativity
(2/3) Uniqueness: Enchantments becoming creatures has been a thing since Urza's Block. The fact that this also has a scaling Pyrohemia effect blended in adds some variety to its applications.
(1.5/3) Flavor: The name fits very well for the Demon appearing when no one else is around, but is disconnected from the damage each upkeep.
Polish
(2.5/3) Quality: "Lurking Darkness is a 6/6 Demon creature with flying as long as there are no other creatures on the battlefield." See Rusted Relic. Unlike the Theros Gods or Arix, you are adding a type and qualities once a condition is met, not suppressing ones already present. "Whenever you pay Lurking Darkness's cumulative upkeep, it deals..."
(2/2) *Main Challenge: Cumulative upkeep present.
(2/2) Subchallenges: Not a creature? Yes. CU of a color not found in mana cost? Yes.
Total: 19.5/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Final Scores
bravelion83: 19.25
mirrodin71: 19
Freyleyes: 20.5
Flatline: 19.5
Original Mythological characters? Could we get a little more of a descriptor for that?
Excavate 2
Instant (U)
Draw a card.
Retrace (You may cast this card from your graveyard by discarding a land card in addition to paying its other costs.)
IIW: The original Club Flamingo challenge - Make a mass removal card.
Welcome to the Final MCC for MTG Salvation. Due to the desire to make sure this contest concludes before the site is archived into read-only mode, there will only be three rounds. Contestants will have five days to design, and judges will be given four days to complete scoring. With that stated, let's begin the send off for this site that has entertained and informed this community for more than a decade.
Round 1 Challenge: Design a split card with Fuse.
Subchallenge 1: Both sides are multicolor, but neither side share any colors.
Subchallenge 2: The word creature does not appear anywhere on the card.
As needed.
Design Deadline is the 5th of June, 2019 at 23:59 EDT.
Judging Deadline is the 9th of June, 2019 at 23:59 EDT.
Design
(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: /25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.
Judges
Eventide Sojourner
void_nothing
The_Hittite
One or two more Judges would be fantastic.
Contestants
Algernone25
Artorias
BlackWaltz3
bravelion83
Flatline
Freyleyes
Hemlock
IcariiFA
Jimmy Groove
kwanyeegor
mirrodin71
Mr. Rithaniel
netn10
StonerOfKruphix
Subject16
TotallyHaywire
Judge Assignments
Eventide Sojourner
Algernone25
Artorias
BlackWaltz3
bravelion83
Flatline
Freyleyes
void_nothing
Hemlock
IcariiFA
Jimmy Groove
kwanyeegor
mirrodin71
The_Hittite
Mr. Rithaniel
netn10
StonerOfKruphix
Subject16
TotallyHaywire