MTG Salvation

Palendeel, Planar Ward-Tower 7
Legendary Artifact (M)
Colorless creatures get -X/-X, where X is that creatures converted mana cost.
8: Target creature becomes colorless until the beginning of your next upkeep.
"Did you think Valdeels mana purity was organic? Perfection is many things, but not natural."
—Tyveral, The Immaculate

---

Design
(2.5/3) Appeal - Timmy likes this as repeatable removal for opposing creatures, even if he would probably prefer to use his own creatures. Johnny can certainly find some way to exploit the activated ability. Spike also likes this as potentially repeatable removal, but she's a bit turned down by the high mana costs, that Timmy and Johnny care much less about.
(3/3) Elegance - No problems here.

Development
(3/3) Viability - I see no problems with a colorless artifact doing this. I could maybe see this at regular rare, but I have no problems with this card being mythic.
(3/3) Balance - I think that both costs are high enough. For today's standards, a colorless artifact that acts as removal needs to cost seven mana or more. The activated ability is also hidden removal, and for that reason I would have wanted the activation cost to be at least seven mana, which it is, so that's good. I'd say that this card's playability would depend on how many colorless creatures were played in the format, but having a built-in way to turn things colorless makes this more universally playable, which is at the same time a blessing and a curse, because it gets more playable but it can go in any deck, which has historically caused problems with strong artifacts. I can see this getting played in any format with a relative abundance of colorless creatures with square stats. I can't see any problems in casual or multiplayer.

Creativity
(2/3) Uniqueness - We've already seen all the component pieces, but they've been put together in a way that gives this card its own clear identity.
(3/3) Flavor - The only problem I might have had with the name is that it's quite long, but thanks to the single symbol in the mana cost it fits in the M15 frame without any problem (I checked in MSE). No problems with the flavor text or card concept either. The flavor text, in particular, is very true.

Polish
(1/3) Quality - Wording problems in the first ability. It should be: "Each colorless creature gets -X/-X, where X is that creature's converted mana cost." The first two are obviously connected, so a single -0.5 takes care of both. The lack of the apostrophe is a serious grammar mistake that completely changes the meaning (so -1): "creatures" is just a plural noun, "creature's" is a possessive form and singular. Finally, the article "the" in the flavor text attribution should not be capitalized (first example that I found: Abbey Griffin, -0.5).
(2/2) Main Challenge - You took advantage of the fact that Emrakul has a CMC equal to its toughness. No problems with that. As this artifact enters, its static ability immediately kicks in and gives -13/-13 to Emrakul, killing her. That's all good.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.

Total: 21.5/25

Steel Wind 4
Enchantment Artifact R
T, Pay X life, Sacrifice Steel Wind: Destroy each nonland permanent with converted mana cost X.
"A gust which cuts and rends as though it were made of hardened metal? Only a god could have dreamed up something like this."
—Enebish Möngke, caravan guide.

---

Design
(2/3) Appeal - Timmy likes when he plays this, but he's afraid of this being played against him. The text reads well to Johnny, but I don't see many uses for him. Spike is in love with this card.
(3/3) Elegance - No problems here.

Development
(3/3) Viability - I think this is something that a colorless artifact can do. I can't see this at any rarity less than rare.
(1.5/3) Balance - Being immediately usable, because an artifact has no summoning sickness, might be a problem. You essentially have to read this as if it were an instant instead of an artifact, and I admit it worries me a little. There are multiple balancing factors though: mostly the fact that you have to pay life equal to the CMC (so, for example, it will cost you 13 life to get rid of Emrakul) and the fact that the words "or less" are not there. The CMC has to be exact. Another problem might be that this card has the same issue that R&D has had with every artifact block: this can just go in any deck, which has historically required bannings. That's why they're pushing colored artifacts now. Another thing to keep into account is that this gets rid of all tokens for free. The overall package might be balanced, but I feel like we're playing in a potentially risky space. In multiplayer, this gets even stronger than it already is, as more players means more stuff to destroy.

Creativity
(2.5/3) Uniqueness - It immediately reminded me of Ratchet Bomb and Pernicious Deed. Of course, it technically works differently, but the similarities are definitely there. We've also already seen colorless enchantments, even if not too many, or maybe actually just one: Eldrazi Conscription. I can't remember any other existing, and especially any colorless global enchantment. That helps here.
(3/3) Flavor - I had to google the name of the character to know if it was an already existing character, either in MTG or elsewhere. It turns out it doesn't, but that's how I discovered that the word "Möngke" means "eternal" in the Mongolian language. I guess that's intended as some kind of hidden Easter egg in the flavor text, and it works perfectly in that regard. No problems with the card name, and the card concept is also very good, with the association between gods and enchantments we've seen in Theros.

Polish
(2.5/3) Quality - The full stop at the end of the flavor text attribution should not be there (-0.5).
(2/2) Main Challenge - Things like this are what I had in mind when I was writing the Main Challenge.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.

Total: 21.5/25

Scam U
Sorcery (Rare)
Exile target creature you don't control. Put a permanent card with the same converted mana cost as the exiled creature onto the battlefield under its owner's control. If you can't, you lose the game.

---

Design
(1/3) Appeal - Timmy isn't interested in such a risky card, and not risky in a good way for him, that's the thrill of the risk. Here the risk is losing the game, and that's just too much for Timmy. Johnny loves this card. Spike is not as afraid as Timmy, but I don't think she likes the hidden cost of having the right permanent already in your hand as you cast this. Overall, I think that just reading the last sentence would turn away enough players, except for the uber-Johnnies.
(1/3) Elegance - As is, you don't even know where to put the permanent into play from (see Quality), and, in addition to being a functional mistake, that's definitely an aspect of the card that will leave you perplex as you read it. If this mistake were corrected, this area would also definitely improve.

Development
(3/3) Viability - This plays into the transformation aspect of blue, so I guess it's fine in the color pie. I wouldn't want to see this at any less than rare.
(2/3) Balance - Assuming this puts the permanent into play from your hand (see Quality), I don't think there's any problem with the rate or the mana cost of this card. You get rid of a permanent but exchanging it with one with the same CMC, and I think that's kind of an automatic balance. Losing the game is definitely a harsh drawback if you can't, that prevents you from playing this at all unless you can take advantage of it or break the symmetry somehow (Johnny is listening). In this, it heavily reminds me of the Pact cycle from Future Sight. Definitely a risky card to play. The problem in casual and multiplayer is always the same: how does this work exactly?

Creativity
(3/3) Uniqueness - Definitely original, even if a very risky way.
(2/3) Flavor - No problems with the name, and I actually like seeing unused one-word card names, which helps here. No flavor text, but I don't even need MSE to know that there is definitely room here.

Polish
(2/3) Quality - "Put a permanent card... onto the battlefield..." Yes, but from where? Your hand? (That's what I think your intent was.) A graveyard, either yours, your opponent's, or any? From exile? From the library somehow? This card needs to say it explicitly. This is a functional mistake, so -1.
(1/2) Main Challenge - Emrakul gets exiled immediately and doesn't come back. Technically good as far as the letter of the challenge is concerned, but I feel like the fact that you can, and will actually have to most probably (unless you just want to lose the game... but I don't think you want to), give your opponent another copy of Emrakul, and your own copy actually (assuming this puts the permanent on the battlefield from your hand, see Quality), goes against the spirit of the challenge. How many permanents that cost exactly 13 mana are there in the history of MTG, except for Emrakul? Ok, Gatherer answers me: none. Only Emrakul. So you can't even give your opponent something else. Your choice is: another Emrakul (so what was the point in getting rid of her in the first place?) or losing the game. Definitely goes against the spirit of the challenge.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.

Total: 17/25

Zevverez, Shattered Time 3UR
Legendary Creature - Weird Wizard {MR}
Haste, flying
Whenever Zevverez enters the battlefield it gets +2/+0 until end of turn for each time a creature named Zevverez, Shattered Time has enters the battlefield under your control this turn.
UR: Exile Zevverez, then return it to the battlefield under your control. If it was attacking, Zevverez enters the battlefield tapped and attacking.
2/2

---

Design
(2.5/3) Appeal - Timmy can appreciate a hasty flyer that can get arbitrarily large as long as you have mana to pay for its ability, that also lets this creature avoid removal very easily. Johnny is in heaven. Spike also really likes the resilience to removal, much more than the base stats.
(1/3) Elegance - Long text, some players will definitely need to read this multiple times to get it, and a lot of math involved (see Main Challenge).

Development
(3/3) Viability - There are both blue and red components here, so no problems with the color pie. If this is not supposed to be a mythic, I don't know what a mythic should be. It's definitely mythic.
(2.5/3) Balance - I find this card very hard to judge in this area. Requiring two mana of different colors to activate each time definitely helps here. A 2/2 with flying and haste costs three mana as a base (Skyknight Legionnaire). The flicker ability kind of has its own cost. Is the triggered ability worth the additional two mana? Maybe. Probably. You also have to take into account the built-in resilience against removal (see Appeal), that's the thing that worries me a little about this card. I feel like that already might be worth the additional mana all by itself. In the end, if it's not at the correct rate, it's probably close enough. I can easily see this getting played in both limited and Standard. The only problem I can see for casual players is the very high complexity. I see none in multiplayer.

Creativity
(3/3) Uniqueness - I can't say that this card is not original.
(1.5/3) Flavor - "Weird Wizard" is weird. What this card does is also definitely weird. (Those are only jokes if it's not obvious.) If I read this card's name by itself, before reading all the rest, I expect something about extra turns or modifying the phases of a turn, not a power bonus. Maybe the flicker effect. No flavor text, but no room for it. It's already nine lines in MSE without it.

Polish
(0.5/3) Quality - Flying should come before haste (recent example: Adeliz, the Cinder Wind, and also the aforementioned Skyknight Legionnaire, -0.5). It's usually the first mention of a legendary permanent's name in its rules text that gets the full name, with all the following ones getting the shorter version. Here it's the second mention that's the full one, but mechanically it needs to be the full name in that instance. My doubt here is: is that enough, or does the first instance too need to be the full name? As I don't know the answer to that, and I haven't been able to find any precedent, I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt on this. A comma is certainly missing after the ETB trigger condition, and this is a functional mistake (as is, that trigger doesn't even work) so -1. "Has enters" is a clear and serious grammar mistake, so -1 as well.
(1/2) Main Challenge - Ok, this technically meets my clarifications, so I'm accepting it. It's clear that you were trying to test the limits of the challenge though. So, what does this need to get rid of Emrakul? It needs to block Emrakul, which I said you could assume (Emrakul always attacking and your creature always blocking), but it needs to get a power higher than Emrakul's base toughness (13) to kill her in combat, and so this creature needs to get +12/+0 to be able to do it. How many times do you need to activate the last ability to get there? Let's see: the first time you flicker it, it gets +2/+0, for a total power of 4 (needs to be 14). The second time, it gets +4/+0, for a total power of 6 (this creature's base power gets reset to 2 every time you flicker it). The third time, it gets +6/+0, for a total power of 8. The fourth time, +8/+0 and 10 power. Fifth time, +10/+0 and 12 power. Finally, the sixth time, this gets +12/+0 and has 14 power, enough to kill Emrakul. As I also said you essentially had infinite mana to activate abilities, this is also technically fine, but needing to activate an ability six times before combat damage to get rid of an attacking Emrakul is not exactly what I meant when I said that your card had to get rid of Emrakul immediately. You were clearly just looking for a way to stretch the intended boundaries of the Main Challenge while still meeting it but only technically.
(1/2) Subchallenges - No white or black, but the word "end" is there ("...gets +2/+0 until end of turn...").

Total: 16/25

Baahon, Ovinomancer Elite 2UG
Legendary Creature - Moonfolk Wizard (MR)
Flash
Flying
When Baahon, Ovinomancer Elite enters the battlefield, destroy target creature. It's controller creates a 0/1 green Sheep creature token.
Return three lands you control to their owner's hand: Return Baahon to its owner's hand.
2/1

---

Design
(2/3) Appeal - I can't see much for Timmy on this card. This card is just Johnny paradise. Spike also sees a lot of value in this card.
(3/3) Elegance - Not the shortest card in the world, but still very easy to understand. Its complexity is mainly strategic, aka the good kind. The last ability obviously does remind me of Kamigawa Moonfolk, but this card also reminds me of Lorwyn Faeries, probably because of the flash and flying combination.

Development
(3/3) Viability - We know from Maro that Pongify effects could and maybe should be actually Simic. I'm in the "totally should" camp. They've always felt wrong to me in monoblue. The token being green also makes this card feel green too. Flash is primary blue and secondary green, flying and the last ability are blue, so no problems with the color pie. I can see this card as a mythic, especially because the last ability allows the ETB effect, that's already at instant speed thanks to flash, to be repeatable on top of that.
(1.5/3) Balance - This is a mythic, but I would have still liked to see a mana activation cost attached somewhere to help prevent potential infinite loops. Certainly playable in limited, and I can easily see this in Standard as hard removal in a color combination that has trouble with that. Let's just face it, a 0/1 is nothing in exchange for getting rid of Emrakul or any other big creature. This card's ETB effect might just be Murder and there wouldn't be much of a difference in its play pattern. I'll be honest: I'm a bit worried by the ETB effect being repeatable. It would be very interesting to playtest this card. No additional problems in casual, except for the fact that I can see this being a little unfun to play against, or in multiplayer.

Creativity
(2.5/3) Uniqueness - This is the first non-monoblue Moonfolk. It's also the first Moonfolk with flash, and the first with both a "return some lands to hand" ability in addition to a triggered one. The only existing Moonfolk with a triggered ability, but without the "return lands to hand" activated one, is a flip card (a real flip card! Don't ever confuse Kamigawa flip cards with DFCs!): Erayo, Soratami Ascendant. Many "firsts" in a single card, and that's good here. Moonfolk and their typical ability do already exist though, especially Soratami Mirror-Mage, but it's not a big problem given all the rest that I've just said.
(2.5/3) Flavor - The name is an obvious reference to the onomatopoeic sound of a sheep in English, and I have no big problems with that. MSE shows me that up to a couple lines of flavor text could technically fit, but the card does look much better without it, so that's also not a big problem.

Polish
(0.5/3) Quality - Wrong order of mana symbols in the mana cost: green should come before blue. The shortest path in the color wheel is through white rather than through black and red (-1, the right order of mana symbols should be very well known, certainly for pairs and shards, I might understand a slight uncertainty with wedges, but now the Tarkir order is the only officially accepted one if somebody's wondering). "It's controller" is without apostrophe! It's a possessive adjective, not a verb! It completely changes meaning, so -1 for serious grammar mistake. How can you remember it? Well, if we're talking about a sheep, given the card, do you see that? It's its fur! Also, another problem with the possessive form later: "their owners" is (rightly) plural, so the last ability's activation cost should say "their owners' hands". Notice the plural "s" in "owners" and "hands", and the position of the apostrophe (-0.5). The most recent example is right in M20: Captivating Gyre.
(2/2) Main Challenge - Emrakul goes away immediately as the result of a creature's ETB effect and never returns. This was specifically allowed in the clarifications, so no problem.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.

Total: 19/25

Rend Wings G
Sorcery (C)
Destroy target creature with flying.
"Have you ever seen a Glen Elendra fearie without wings? Pathetic view."
—Marenda, elvish hunter

---

Design
(2.5/3) Appeal - Timmy would probably prefer to play flyers himself, but he also likes to get rid of opposing flyers. This is just not a card for Johnny in its obvious use. If he finds a way to use this card to destroy his own flyers to get some kind of advantage, that's when he would use it. Spike likes a lot the mana efficiency of this card, it can't get better than that, but she might not appreciate this being a sorcery and not an instant. But again, if this were an instant it couldn't be so cheap.
(3/3) Elegance - Perfect.

Development
(3/3) Viability - No problems with the color pie. Rarity is definitely right. I'm pleasantly surprised to see a common card as an MCC submission, it doesn't happen every day.
(3/3) Balance - Plummet is the obvious reference point. This costs one mana less but it's a sorcery. I'm perfectly fine with that exchange. My only remark is that Plummet is really just a sideboard card, in limited too. This would also be, but not every card can be an all star. This card has a specific job, and it does it very well, at the right cost and a not too high but still definitely acceptable power level. No problems in casual or multiplayer, or in any format really.

Creativity
(0.5/3) Uniqueness - This is the weak spot of this card. This is just a sorcery version of Plummet, and we've seen several variations on that theme along the years. Not a full zero only because it's technically not a reprint or a functional reprint of any already existing card.
(3/3) Flavor - Name, flavor text, and card concept are all just perfect. No reason not to give you full points here. I'd give you bonus points for setting the card on what's probably my favorite plane ever: Lorwyn. And if anybody from Wizards is actually reading this, first you probably shouldn't, and second just know that the complete lack of humans is a big part of that. I see humans every day in the real world, I don't need them to be the prevalent race on every plane of the Multiverse. But I digress...

Polish
(2.5/3) Quality - "Fearie" in the flavor text is clearly a typo (-0.5).
(2/2) Main Challenge - This is what I expected to see for the Main Challenge. Emrakul flies, so even if she doesn't technically have them, her wings are rended without any problem, and immediately as this resolves. Full points here.
(1.5/2) Subchallenges - Both met. You "got burned" in round 1 about Subchallenge 2, here you did it again but luckily only once EDIT: actually three times, the other two times you've hidden it so well that I didn't see it until now, after several rereads of the judgments to fix typos. ("Rend" contains "end", EDIT: as do "Glen Elendra" and "Marenda" in the flavor text. Now I actually think that "Glen Elendra" containing "end" might be the real reason why you set this card on Lorwyn.) I'm not a fan of trying to stretch the boundaries of a challenge like this or like you did in round 1. You got burned in round 1, you get burned again here (-0.5). But if you advance, I predict that you're really going to like the last round! There is obviously a reason why Subchallenge 2 was the same in both rounds 1 and 2...

Total: 21/25

IcariiFA: 21.5
Mr. Rithaniel: 21.5
netn10: 17

Superbajt: 21
Jimmy Groove: 19
Cardz5000: 16

Unmask the Impostor 1U
Sorcery U
Exile target creature. Its controller creates a 2/2 blue Shapeshifter creature token with “This creature can’t be blocked.”
Some impersonators are so convincing they can fool their own masters.

---

Design
(2/3) Appeal - I can't see Timmy being a big fan of this card. Johnny might want to try to find a way to use this on his own creatures. Actually, he can just replace a useless 0/1 or 1/1 creature of his with a more relevant unblockable 2/2 on his own side of the battlefield. Probably not the intended use of this card, but things like this are what Johnny would like to do, and thanks to the specific wording you used, he can do them. Kind of like he can path his own creature to go get a land himself. Spike likes this as pseudo-removal for big opposing creatures.
(3/3) Elegance - No problems here.

Development
(3/3) Viability - This effect is in blue, even though I'm not a big fan of that. If Swords to Plowshares, Path to Exile, and Pongify are uncommon, this can definitely be too.
(2/3) Balance - The most interesting comparison, in my opinion, is with the aforementioned Pongify. One more mana to exile instead of destroying and either give your opponent a smaller token or get yourself an unblockable token. But on the other side, it's a sorcery instead of an instant and gives your opponent an unblockable token or a smaller one to you. It also loses its rarely relevant anti-regeneration clause. Overall, I wonder if this could cost only one mana like Pongify. Playtest would be needed to know the answer, but what this comparison leaves me with is a reasonable certainty that this card is far from broken. In limited you'll most likely play this card, blue has a hard time with removal and this gets close enough. Actually, I totally consider this kind of cards hard removal personally, as you often just kill a relevant creature substituting it with an almost irrelevant token, or anyway much less relevant than the original creature. This is the reason why I'm not a huge fan of this kind of effect in monoblue. It's too close to hard removal for my taste. I have a hard time seeing this in competitive constructed. No problems in casual constructed or multiplayer though.

Creativity
(1/3) Uniqueness - There is a long line of existing cards designed throughout the years that leads to this. Technically new, but a rather easy place to go to.
(3/3) Flavor - Strong name, strong flavor text, good card concept. No problems here.

Polish
(3/3) Quality - This is the only card out of seven that I'm judging this round that has no Quality mistakes, and it's out of competition. What a good job I've done... Again, I apologize. It's completely my own fault.
(2/2) Main Challenge - Cast this and Emrakul immediately goes away, with a much more innocuous unblockable 2/2 and no way to come back. Good.
(2/2) Subchallenges - Both met.

Total: 21/25

Burbling Slough
Land R
T: Add C.
(2/B)(2/G), Sacrifice a creature: Put a +1/+1 counter on Burbling Slough. Until end of turn, it becomes a 0/0 black and green Ooze creature. It's still a land.
Fed the ground
—Snakekin military slang meaning
"Lost and presumed dead"

---

Strong submission, no apparent mistakes, solid ability and I also like the idea of simply not having a mana cost to automatically meet the challenge. I can't find a single defect here. I will only mention that yesterday (Thursday) night I went to play at a Standard tournament at my LGS and I've seen a bit too many copies of Nissa animating lands, and this card reminded me of it, obviously because after one day it's still fresh in my mind. But that's certainly not your fault, and again, I see nothing wrong with this card.

Liturgic Protocol W
Instant (r)
Kicker (You may pay an additional as you cast this spell.)
Spells your opponents cast this turn cost an additional 1.
If Liturgic Protocol was kicked, spells you cast this turn cost 1 less to cast.
Things are done in a way, and we know that way very well.

---

The advice I gave you about using mana tags instead of simlies applies here too, but there's the only little mistake here, and I do like this card. Taxing and rules setting can justify this card if you don't kick it or pay 2 to do, but the kicker effect is also something that blue can do. It's not the kind of effect I like to play with, but that's just personal preference. This card makes a lot of sense in itself.

Regisaur Fossil 4
Artifact (Rare)
T: Add B.
, Exile a creature card from your graveyard: Until end of turn, Regisaur Fossil becomes a 5/4 black Dinosaur Skeleton artifact creature with "Sacrifice another creature: Regisaur Fossil gains indestructible until end of turn".
It may be dead, but it's still hungry.

---

Four mana for a monocolored mana rock might look a bit much to some players... But I admit I'm looking for little details because there are more than three cards I like in this bracket so I have to leave some off the top 3. I have absolutely no problems with anything on this card that's not the mana cost. I like the name and flavor text a lot, I like the animation ability, and flavor and mechanics come together very well to make a nice package. Solid work definitely.

Nimbus-Host General 2WW
Creature--Elemental Soldier (Rare)
Flying, lifelink, double strike
at the beginning of each player's upkeep, Nimbus-Host General gets +0/+2 until end of turn for each creature that player controls
(2/U)(2/U)(2/R)(2/R): Switch the power and toughness of Nimbus-Host General until end of turn
It takes many clouds all pushed together to make the biggest storm
1/4

---

Many quality/formatting... inaccuracies? Mistakes might be too strong of a word. Anyway, that and a card that's a bit too complicated for my taste. I'm sorry. As Maro always says, it just means it's not for me.

Achiorl, Meadows Sentry 2GW
Legendary Creature - Centaur Archer (R)
Vigilance, reach
T, (2/R): Create an artifact trap token with "Whenever one or more creatures attack you, sacrifices this. If you do, this deals 1 damage to each attacking creature."
The only thing hunted among the Harchon Meadows are enemies of the wilderness.
3/4

---

Quality mistakes, all in the activated ability: the tap symbol should come after the mana symbol in the activation cost, the word "trap" should be capitalized (it's a subtype and those always are), an extra "s" at the end of "sacrifices" (it's not third person), and today they're noticeably trying to avoid using "this" as a pronoun, so this card would very probably just say "this artifact" in both instances. But overall, I still like the card well enough despite that. Dealing 1 damage is a perfect example of an effect that colorless could probably do at high enough of a cost, and I think there are several existing colorless artifacts that already do that, but that red does much more efficiently, so this looks like a perfect use for two-brid mana. Both colors in the mana colors are represented and the stats are solid. Overall, I'd say the idea is very good, only the execution could have been a bit better.

Overheated Forge 3
Artifact (R)
Equipment spells you cast cost 1 less to cast.
(2/R)(2/R)(2/R), sacrifice Overheated Forge: Overheated Forge deals X damage to each creature and each player, where X is the amount of mana spent to activate this ability.
The purest fuel makes the hottest fire.

---

I like this card very much, and I honestly can't find a single defect in it. Perfect flavor, solid mechanics, original use of two-brid mana. I think I've found my first place.

Main Challenge
• The card you have to get rid of is specifically Emrakul, the Promised End and NOT Emrakul, the Aeons Torn. When I mention Emrakul from now on in these clarifications, I will be referring to The Promised End and not The Aeons Torn, even if I don't mention it explicitly.
• Pay attention to the wording of the main challenge. It has been specifically and intentionally crafted to only allow certain kinds of cards while excluding others. Essentially, the card itself can't mention any way for Emrakul to re-enter the battlefield. If Emrakul re-enters because your opponent casts it again or because of an interaction with a different card, it's fine.What matters is that your card has no built-in way for Emrakul to re-enter. Examples:
- Gaining control of Emrakul does NOT count, because it remains on the battlefield, it only changes side. Emrakul has to leave the battlefield.
- Flickering/blinking Emrakul does NOT count, because it re-enters the battlefield either immediately or at end of turn, and your card can't allow it to re-enter the battlefield at any time. Emrakul has to stay out of the battlefield.
- Oblivion Ring or Banishing Light-style removal is NOT allowed, because Emrakul re-enters as an effect of that same card when the enchantment leaves the battlefield. Emrakul has to stay out of the battlefield.
- Returning Emrakul to its owner's hand with something like a sorcery Unsummon is fine (remember Emrakul's protection from instants), as long as the card doesn't specify any way for them to recast it.
- Because of Emrakul's protection from instants, any instant that needs to target Emrakul to work automatically fails the Main Challenge, and will be thus DQ'ed. You've been warned.


See this post in the discussion thread for more.

Subchallenge 1
• Any color combination that contains white or black is NOT allowed.
• Any hybrid mana symbols containing white or black are NOT allowed.
• The challenge looks at every part of the card, not just the mana cost. Specifically, no white or black mana symbols are allowed to be in the rules text.

Subchallenge 2
• This includes every part of the card. The word "end" can't be there in the card name, type line, rules text, or flavor text.
• The word "end" is forbidden, in any form, meaning, or conjugation. (See examples below.)
• Words that contain the sequence of letters "E-N-D" are allowed, provided that they are not derived words of the word "end". (See examples below.)

Examples

Things allowed:
- A card with "Spend this mana only to cast (something)" in its rules text.
- A card with the type line "Legendary (insert card type here)".
- A card named "Bending Time".
- A card with the flavor text "A good person lends everything they have to their friends."

Things forbidden:
- A card named "End of Times" or "End of the War" (both custom cards that I submitted in the DCC last month).
- A card named "Commence the Endgame", as the word "endgame" is derived of "end", in fact being a contraction of "end of the game".
- A card with an effect that lasts "until end of turn" or "until end of combat".
- A card with a triggered ability that triggers "at the beginning of your/each end step".
- A card with the flavor text "The time for war has ended." Here the word "ended" is derived of "end", in fact being the past simple and past participle of the verb "to end".
- A card with the flavor text "The time for war is ending." Here the word "ending" is derived of "end", in fact being the gerund of the verb "to end".
- A card with the flavor text "The end justifies the means." That's even if the word "end" has a slightly different meaning here, but it's still the same word.


If you have any other question, feel free to ask in the discussion thread.

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: X/25
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.