Weekend Click through to see this weekend's art and the design requirements for your card submission, due Monday morning. Every submission warrants feedback, which I will try to provide, and which everyone is welcome to provide as well.
If you choose, you may use that feedback to revise your submission any number of times. I will post and review the most recent submission from each designer some time on Monday, life permitting. To help ensure I recreate your design accurately, please use CARDNAME instead of ~ in your submissions.
Design only one card. Note that once someone has chained off of your design, you can't change it in such a way that their design no longer interacts with it.
Here's our starting point (chosen entirely at random):
I'll start.
ReplyDeleteHissing Miasma is a rattlesnake of a defense; You can attack me, but it's going to hurt you too, possibly more.
If red were to do that, hmm...
Sparking Retribution 1RR
Enchantment (unc)
At the beginning of your upkeep step, put an X/1 red Elemental creature token OTB with haste and trample. Exile it at EOT. X is the total damage dealt to you since your last turn.
Memory issues might push this to rare. As it is, I get it. Probably everyone HERE gets it. Johnny Two-Packs who learned how to play yesterday might struggle.
DeleteCharge counters and X 1/1 tokens with haste might help keep this at unc. Seems odd to add counters and multiple tokens to "simplify" it though.
Whether to make this rare or not, and whether to key off of damage dealt, life lost, or the number of creatures that attacked you were my two biggest questions when designing this.
DeleteThis is in a similar space as Blood Hound. That was printed as rare, but I could maybe see it as uncommon today.
DeleteTracking damage dealt to you, particularly in a multiplayer game, could be a fair bit of work, so I definitely think this should be rare, if it exists at all.
DeleteSparking Retribution repeatedly gives you a 'temporary' creature, something that red does a lot of (with Archwing Dragon, Viashino Sandstalker, and the like). Green has been known to do similar things and to use haste and trample to good effect. What if we combined those effects?
ReplyDeleteMigrating Forest 3GG
Creature- Treefolk Elemental (Rare)
5/5
Haste, trample
At the beginning of your end step, return a creature you control to its owner's hand.
As is, this may play more like Obzedat than Stampeding Wildebeests. I think moving the trigger to your upkeep would take some of the "trickiness" out, not bleed Red's slice of the pie, AND leave it open to sorcery speed removal.
DeleteWow, I didn't know about Stampeding Wildebeests. I agree with moving the trigger to your upkeep, to be more consistent with that and Roaring Primadox.
DeleteYou don't see a lot of treefolk with haste.
DeleteI like Migrating Forest as a transition from Sparking Retribution. With the upkeep change, this is a conceivable green rare, although it helps me to realize how much more interesting Wildebeests is without haste.
Migrating Forest is like the Stampeding Wildebeests cycle, but flashier to be suited for rare. It's also useful even if the only creature it's bouncing is itself, unlike the original cycle.
ReplyDeleteA similar rare upgrade to Eiganjo Free-Riders might look like:
Rousing Skymarshal, 3WW
Creature - Human Soldier (rare)
4/4
Flying
Whenever a nontoken creature with flying enters the battlefield under your control, put a 1/1 white Soldier creature token onto the battlefield.
At the beginning of your upkeep, return a creature you control to its owner's hand.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI had to read this a few times to "get" it. The limitations are reasonable, the flavor is good and unique! (My dude organizes paratroopers!) But the execution needs tightening up.
Delete"Nontoken" leads you into the mind space of "Ok, this guy's tokens don't re-trigger him."
"Flying" sends you further along the same trail. "This guys tokens probably have flying, otherwise, why would it have specified nontoken?"
Then, when you finish reading the card, the tokens don't have flying.
Can you tighten this up somehow?
Fair comment. "nontoken creature with flying" is perhaps overkill. Either half could be removed, or the tokens could be given flying. Each option is slightly interesting in a different way.
DeleteFor the sake of the wrap-up, let's remove "with flying", since that ties in least to the chain, and make it "Whenever a nontoken creature ETBs under your control".
Another solid color transition here.
DeleteRousing Skymarshal is an exciting card, giving you an efficient flier, lots of free creatures, and a way to retrigger your ETB creatures.
I definitely approve of removing "with flying" from the text. It may only save us two words physically, but it saves us much more mindspace.
White shares with green the love for creatures, and specifically for creatures entering the battlefield (Goldnight Commander, Cathar's Crusade, Bronzebeck Moa, Aura Shards, Evolve, etc.).
ReplyDeleteSo I made this (I hope) flavorful enchantment:
Timely Protection 2WW
Enchantment (Rare)
Whenever a creature enters the battlefield under your control, you may have target creature you control gain protection from a color of your choice until end of turn.
When hope was about to be lost, the Champion appeared, and lead her companions to salvation.
— The Theriad
This was designed in response of Migrating Forest, but in the meanwhile I posted this, there was another design.
DeleteI will leave this here, but
PLEASE DO SKIP THIS for the sake of the chain.
(I wait for thoughts about the situation, Jay)
The situation is awkward and illustrates a failure in the design of the challenge itself because it's both likely and derailing. In this case, Mike has admirably attempted to accommodate both white designs.
DeleteThe only 'solution' I coming up with is that pre-empted submissions are to be ignored (perhaps deleted) and those designers can try again. Unlike other options, the biggest downside of that is forcing more designing, but isn't that what we're here for?
Please anyone share other solutions you think might be better.
Agreed. First come, first serve sounds like the cleanest way to go.
DeleteIn an unrelated note, with the one card limit imposed, I hope you have the time for a wrap up on Monday.
As for the card:
Delete2WW is a lot. You could totally shave off a mana or two.
Looks like fun
Reminds me of Kabira Evangel. With this only granting prot-colour to one creature I agree this could be down at 2 mana.
DeleteYeah, I thought the same way about the design; I will not delete it, but it will be simply ignored for the chain, and I will hopefully make another design later. Regarding the cost, yes I wanted to play safe, but maybe I overdid.
DeleteWell, both the Sky Marshal and the Timely Protection play around in the same area of ETB triggers, so I'll just riff off of both of them...
ReplyDeleteAEther Reflection
4U
Enchantment
Rare
At the beginning of your upkeep if you control no reflections, put a token onto the battlefield that's a copy of target creature. Its a reflection in addition to its other types.
At the beginning of your end step sacrifice all reflections you control.
This is a very cool Clone variant, sort of Cryptoplasm meets Seance. I'm immediately trying to think of ways to break it and not coming up with any, which is a good sign on both counts.
DeleteI guess this works out fairly similar to Conjurer's Closet. But it lets you get in attacks with your token FTKs, like Kiki-Jiki would.
DeleteI'm not sure what's the point in the "if you control no Reflections" clause given that this makes you sacrifice all your Reflections each turn anyway...
Actually it doesn't let you attack. That's fine, but I think it's more fun the other way. What about combining the two triggers?
Delete"At the beginning of your end step, sacrifice all Reflections you control, then put a token onto the battlefield that's a copy of target creature. It's a reflection in addition to its other types."
Right on Jules. I love consolidating both abilities into one. Also, its a little less Seance and a little more practical. That's a win, too.
DeleteOfficial change to: that thing he said.
Aether Reflection shares in common with Rousing Skymarshal both token creation and creature loss, in addition to the subtle commonality of combo'ing with ETB triggers.
DeleteClone-Seance seems like it should be a big hit with Johnnies.
Jules' text not only consolidates the whole thing, but also allows you to attack with your reflection, which isn't necessary but will be a big plus to non-Johnnies.
It's a real shame, though, that neither version scales fully with multiples. It is neat how it matches Spirit Mirror and Pure Reflection.
Dark Substitute 4B
ReplyDeleteEnchantment (r)
At the beginning of your upkeep, if you don't control a Reflection, lose five life and put a 0/5 Reflection creature token onto the battlefield with "All damage that would be dealt to you is dealt to this creature instead."
Wow!
DeleteThis plays around in the same space as Personal Incarnation, but it's actually a much better design. It's interesting to consider how changing the creature stats affects the card. What is this like with a 0/4? 0/6? 5/5? So many interesting possibilities...
DeleteWhoa, that is striking and exciting.
DeleteI'll echo the calls of "this is awesome" though I'd like it even better as a {B}{W} multicolored card, though obviously that doesn't fit this challenge.
DeleteI thought the exact same thing. It could work as monoblack, though. Its in a gray area. Almost a stretch, but philosophically, kind of on target. Cards like these help define where something like this should live.
DeleteDark Substitute is fascinating. Like a proactive Simulacrum.
DeleteIt's pretty hard to use well. It'll defend you against any 1-4 damage indefinitely, is basically irrelevant against 5 damage, and can save you X-5 damage from larger armies/effects.
It's very black that the last reflection will happily kill you, but I'm not sure the card is strong enough to warrant that drawback.
Can't help but wonder if there's a lich/phylactery effect here:
Dark Reflection {4}{B}
Creature-Reflection (rare)
As ~ ETB, lose all your life. ~ has toughness equal to the life lost this way.
You don't lose the game for having 0 or less life.
0/*
Also, great color shift from AEther Reflection.
DeleteIf "Lich's Mirror" wasn't already a card, I'd've used that name for sure. As it stands, I assume Dark Substitute would probably be a playtest name and that Creative could find some clever title (mirrorlike, lichlike, or both).
DeleteBetter Half 5UU
ReplyDeletePlaneswalker-Riku (M)
~'s starting loyalty is equal to your life total as it enters the battlefield.
-X: When you cast your next instant or sorcery spell with converted mana cost X or less this turn, copy that spell. You may choose new targets for the copy.
-X: When the next creature with converted mana cost X or less enters the battlefield under your control this turn, but a token copy of it onto the battlefield.
*
Did you know, in MSE * appears as .. in the loyalty box?
DeleteI wanted to see if it looked like a brick of text in card form and its actually not bad at all. Certainly better than new big Jace!
Oh, fantastic. A great riff on Riku of Two Reflections and Dark Substitute's Reflection tokens, somehow cancelling each other out to no longer explicitly mention Reflections at all, but beautifully imply them...
DeleteI like the design idea a bunch, but it's a bit unfortunate that you cannot usefully activate either of his abilities the same turn that you cast him. Maybe he warrants a lower casting cost for that reason?
DeleteThat's certainly a major concern. I guess we should let it start lower than we think it can, and if it's too good development may have to kill it since it doesn't work as well costed up. Let's try 3UU to start.
DeleteVery neat. The two -X abilities are VERY Riku (and a great blue riff on Dark Reflection).
DeleteThe loyalty-setting ability doesn't feel blue to me. Probably white. It was good instinct to start this off expensive since players could easily have 15-20 life on turn 4 or 5.
Outside of the context of this challenge, probably makes more sense to just have a static loyalty and a +1 like "bounce target creature if it has the same name as another creature"
Do you people have any idea how awesome you are?
ReplyDeleteUnited Resolve 2W
ReplyDeleteInstant (uncommon)
You gain life equal to the toughness of up to one target creature you control, then you gain life equal to the number of loyalty counters on up to one target planeswalker you control.
United Resolve holds X in common with Better Half, even if it's not written on the card. It also cares about creatures and non-creatures, trading sorcery/instant for planeswalker.
DeleteThis is a solid card, though I can't help but wonder about a cheeky tweak:
United Resolve {2}{W}
Instant (uncommon)
You 3 gain life.
Put 3 loyalty counters on up to one target planeswalker you control.
Shared Knowledge (or Pick His Brain)
ReplyDelete2UUU
Sorcery (R)
Remove any number of loyalty counters from target planeswalker you control. If you do, draw that many cards.
Spells that do nothing unless you control a planeswalker are generally a no-no. What about 'Remove any number of counters from target permanent you control'?
DeleteShared Knowledge + Dark Depths = draw 10, get a free 20/20 in the bargain?
DeleteI hadn't thought of that. But the combo's probably not a deal-breaker, since it requires 6 lands and is banned in Modern.
DeleteHow about:
DeleteShared Knowledge
2UUU
Sorcery (R)
Remove any number of counters from target artifact, creature, or planeswalker you control. If you do, draw that many cards.
This could also use some pithy or badass flavor text. Any ideas?
Delete"I know what you're thinking..."
Delete"I'll releive you of that. Pray I don't alter our bargain again." -Nicol Bolas, to Tezzeret
DeleteShared Knowledge, like United Resolve, cares how many counters are on one of your permanents, but moving from white to blue gives us cards instead of life, which clearly requires a greater cost (removing said counters).
DeleteI like the last version, though given the theme, I might restrict to creatures and planeswalkers, since it seems like the target's personal knowledge is relevant.
Counter Atog
ReplyDelete1B
Creature - Atog
Sacrifice a permanent with counters on it: CARDNAME gets +X/+X until end of turn where X is the amount of counters on the sacrificed permanent.
I'll let creative ruin my dreams of bringing back Atogs. And I'm sure this could be worded better.
Aside from using 'number' rather than 'amount', the wording seems fine. I guess you don't need to specify 'with counters on it' if you don't want to.
DeleteWhat is the P/T on this? 1/2?
I guess there's the old tradition that black shouldn't be allowed to sacrifice its drawback enchantments without help from artifacts?
DeleteIt's a curious choice that the Atog sacrifices the permanent rather than the counters, though that does solve the Dark Depths problem. It also makes it feel more black—I have to say it's interesting any sacrifice effect would need to feel "more black" but the Atog cycle qualifies.
DeleteNice transition from Shared Knowledge.
Melira, Herald of Vengeance (rare)
ReplyDelete1R
Legendary Creature - Human Berserker
-1/-1 counters don't reduce the power of creatures you control.
Whenever you get a poison counter, Melira deals damage equal to its power to target player.
Whenever a -1/-1 counter is placed on a creature you control, Melira deals damage equal to its power to target creature.
2/2
(watermark: Mirran)
First ability could probably be "Each creature you control gets +1/+0 for each -1/-1 counter on it." As with lots of our designs, don't know if the rules actually work with the current wording.
DeleteAnd just checking, the third ability is Melira dealing damage equal to Melira's power?
Good point, Ben. "Its" is ambiguous enough here that I would just say "Melira deals 2 damage" in both cases.
DeleteAlso, very strange that this encourages you to put -1/-1 counters on your own creatures. Was that the intention?
Melira, Herald of Vengeance (rare)
Delete1R
Legendary Creature - Human Berserker
-1/-1 counters don't reduce the power of creatures you control.
Whenever you get a poison counter, Melira deals damage equal to Melira's power to target player.
Whenever a -1/-1 counter is placed on a creature you control, Melira deals damage equal to Melira's power to target creature.
2/2
(watermark: Mirran)
If Johnny wants to put -1/-1 counters on her intentionally, that's Johnny's prerogative. Vorthos would never dream of putting Phyrexian cards in a Mirran deck, though : )
I debated Ben's wording for the first ability. I thought that phrasing it as a math problem might read weird, though.
This is doing a lot of weird stuff. Maybe combining the 2nd and 3rd abilities might help?
DeleteWhenever you get a poison counter or a -1/-1 counter is placed on a creature you control...
or just go ahead and call it out:
Whenever a source with infect an opponent controls deals damage to your or a creature you control...
As a red card though...I dunno about this.
What if you DID go with Ben's wording, but took it a little further?
DeleteEach creature you control gets +2/+0 for each -1/-1 counter on it. Then its not just ignoring the first -1. Its getting mad! This overwrites -1/-1 with "flowstone".
Also, you could replace the second instance of "Melira" in each sentence with "her". Thank you Garruk Relentless
DeleteInstead of removing counters, Melira is benefiting from them. It's definitely a much redder version than the original green one.
DeleteThematically, it's worrisome that she's lost the ability to prevent corruption, though it's awesome that she's so angry about it.
I would propose "Counters don't reduce the power of creatures you control." or even "Nothing can reduce the power of creatures you control" for the first ability and "if an opponent would put a counter on you or a creature you control, Melira deals 2 damage" for the second. Loki's infect path goes the opposite direction but is also reasonable.
Maybe: "If an opponent would put one or more counters on your or a creature you control, Melira deals that much damage..."
DeleteAvacyn, Enforcer of Balance (Mythic)
ReplyDelete4WWBB
Legendary Creature - Angel
When Avacyn, Angel of Balance enters the battlefield, each opponent chooses a number of creatures he or she controls equal to the number of creatures you control, then sacrifices the rest. Opponents sacrifice lands, discard cards, and pay life the same way.
Flying, Vigilance
"I had entertained the idea that the scales would tip in our favor, but never had I thought this would happen if they did." --Radulf, the Lunarch
8/8
(I suspected there was foreshadowing that avacyn would turn on the humans if they ever started winning.)
Ah tits, I just reread that it has to be monocolored. Give me a bit.
Deleteterrifying
DeleteBlack Sun's Dusk B
ReplyDeleteSorcery
Put a -1/-1 counter on each creature.
It probably should cost 1B (Shrivel, Nausea). Btw neat, i love elegant commons that no one has done yet!
DeleteFYI: the opposite of a zenith is a nadir. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nadir
DeleteI assume this is in response to Melira, not Avacyn?
Delete@Ipaulsen Yes, since AVacyn is multicolored and Tigt did not put a replacement.
Delete@P for Pizza: I costed it agressively, since I put it at sorcery speed.
@Evan Jones: Thank you, I had considered Nadir, but that would mean the mana planet would be on the other side of the plane, completely nonexistant. SO for flavor purposes I chose the one part of the cycle Dawn Zenith and Dusk that had not yet been chosen.
I like this at {1}{B}{B} or {2}{B}, WotC is usually pretty conservative when costing -1/-1 counters, esp in mass quantities.
DeleteVery good simple common!
Simple and solid. Places -1/-1 counters rather than hating on them, but it certainly /combos/ with Melira.
DeleteBased on Fading's insistence of low cost, and the cycle to which he's referring, I'm guessing this is rare.
I like all the arguments about rarity we're having here. I personally see it as an uncommon.
DeleteThe cost would determine rarity, I believe. at {b} or {1}{b}, it would be uncommon or rare. At {1}{b} or {b}{b} it would be uncommon. Any more and it would be common.
DeleteIf we change the speed to instant, all these costs need to be upped by {2} or shift to higher rarity.
How would blue do a permanent(ish) mass-shrinking effect for a low mana cost?
ReplyDeletePhantom Watchkeep
1U
Creature - Illusion - Rare
Creatures your opponents control get -1/-0.
Whenever Phantom Watchkeep is the target of a spell or ability, sacrifice it.
1/2
Not sure how this would play, but it feels very Innistrad. I like it.
DeleteThis would be very plausible even without the illusion restriction. I'd suggest either cutting the illusion clause and upping the mana cost by {1}, or upping the -N/-0.
DeleteI like R Stech's goal and execution.
DeleteI'm not sure why, but I instinctively expected/wanted the illusion clause as soon as I read the card type and first ability. Curious how others feel about that.
Moving to white, we have one opposite effect (+1/+1 instead of -1/-0) and a different targeting ability that is (potentially) detrimental, and it is all wrapped up with a flavorful creature type.
ReplyDeleteThoughtweft Paragon - 1WW
Creature - Kithkin Solider (R)
Other Kithkin creatures you control get +1/+1.
Whenever a player casts an instant or sorcery that targets only a single Kithkin, that player copies that spell for each other Kithkin it could target. Each copy targets a different one of those Kithkin.
3/3
Very cool concept. Also, great fleshing out the thoughtweft from Lorwyn/Shadowmoor.
DeleteUnfortunately, the pay off is not white. Either {1}{W}{U} or {1}{R}{W} would be a fitting mana cost, but have to stay monocolored. Other options you could explore for the pay off:
...each other Kithkin creature you control gains protection from that spell's colors
...put a +1/+1 on each other Kithkin you control.
...Untap each other kithkin you control. they gain defender ueot.
You know. White stuff.
Given that this ability has been seen on an artifact creature (Precursor Golem), it seems plausible enough in white to me. (If you've been following the Suvnica design process, you'll know that similar things have been suggested for the WU guild mechanic.)
DeleteThe "each other Kithkin creature you control gains protection from that spell's colors" is a flavor homerun for thoughtweft.
DeleteAt rare, I'm okay with Kithkin-radiance in white. What it lacks in mechanical justification, it makes up for in thematic justification. That said, Loki's other suggestions are inarguably white.
DeleteThoughtweft Paragon doesn't feel related to Phantom Watchkeep to me, apart from having some global creature effect, and I suppose the flavorful creature type point.
Master Illusionist 1UU
ReplyDeleteCreature - Wizard
Creatures your opponents control have "when this is a target of a spell, sacrifice it"
2/2
This should cost more. The enchantment version (with the ability clause) costs 6. It should also be when this creature.
DeleteYeah. Dismiss into Dream is expensive for a reason.
DeleteAlso, it feels kind of cheap coming back to blue with the same basic ability we last left it for.