Weekend Art ChallengeGreetings, artisans! Click through to see this weekend's art and the design requirements for your single card submission, due Monday morning. Every submission warrants feedback, and everyone is encouraged to give feedback. You may use that feedback to revise your submission any number of times, though only the version rendered will be included in the review, if someone volunteers to render the cards.
 |
| Sandara |
 |
| Jeff Young |
Happy Halloween!
Not sure which (witch?) wording I want to use:
ReplyDeleteNocturnal Costumed Onslaught (COM)
3BB
Instant
For each creature you control, choose trick or treat.
Trick creatures gain deathtouch until end of turn.
Treat creatures gain lifelink until end of turn.
For each creature you control, choose trick or treat.
Creatures you chose trick for gain deathtouch until end of turn.
Creatures you chose treat for gain lifelink until end of turn.
Any number of creatures you control gain deathtouch until end of turn. Each other creature you control gains lifelink until end of turn.
The trick or treat wordings are cute, but they're also the sort of thing that show up on one-of rares. Unless there are going to be a lot of trick-or-treating cards, common could do without the added verbiage.
DeleteThat aside, this much lifegain or killing this many creatures would be pushing the boundary for common, and you get to choose. This should probably be uncommon, but if not, it should at least be a sorcery (even if cheaper) so it's a little bit less swingy.
DeleteInstant was definitely a mistake. I appreciate Sanctified Charge and all, but card is supposed to be more like Rush of Battle, where the opponent gets full information before combat.
DeleteAlternatively,
Trick or Treat (COM)
B
Instant
Choose one —
• Target creature gets +0/+1 and gains deathtouch until end of turn.
• Target creature gets +1/+0 and gains lifelink until end of turn.
Haunting Charm 2B
ReplyDeleteInstant (C)
Choose one:
- Target creature gets -2/-2 until end of turn.
- Up to two target creatures you control gain intimidate until end of turn.
- Return target creature card from your graveyard to your hand.
(First art)
DeleteI'm assuming this art is zoomed in on the symbol? If not, I want the effects to be apparent in the art.
DeleteGenerally I like this charm design a lot. My only notes are:
1. R&D has been trying to tone down Intimidate so there are fewer instances of colors getting randomly punished. This is less of an issue on a one-shot effect.
2. Strict cycles (like I assume this belongs to) need to be developed from the start since there's no room for the cost to adjust. This isn't broken, but unless this format is particularly full of 3-toughness creatures, it will likely be black's best common.
Yeah, the symbol and possibly the evil cats. Right-side crop either way though.
DeleteI haven't seen R&D mention toning down intimidate, but rather landwalk and protection. Intimidate is a bit more interactive, bring in your Bronze Sable from the sideboard, or take it as an excuse to splash something. At least there are answers.
DeleteAs to this design, I am a bit disappointed that two of the three abilities involve the number two and the third does not.
Charms also have not been common for a long time, I think this is easily Uncommon (this creates a lot of complexity and is a lot of text).
Also, as Jules alludes to, I think this card is probably a smidge undercosted.
We could go up to 3B and returning two creatures? That seems to cost 4 these days (at sorcery speed, admittedly) and sees only a tiny amount of limited play. As all the effects are simple it doesn't seem too impossible at common, but the move on NWO may move it up these days.
DeleteNWO is about board complexity. Providing interesting choices on one-off spells is fine at common by my understanding of NWO.
DeleteI think interesting choices on one off spells are fine, but spells with three very different modes are too complex for common. I think the closest thing we've gotten to a charm at common recently is something like Naturalize or Crushing Vines.
DeleteNWO isn't only about board complexity. It is about the complexity of opening a pack in a draft and understanding all the cards, and the complexity of later in a draft holding those cards in your hand and deciding what to do. Charms are great exciting cards, but even with all the Khans I've played I still can't tell you all three modes of the five charms there.
Yeah, there is some element of card complexity going on too. The charms in Khans, for the most part, do have some somewhat complex stuff going on: restrictions tacked on ala Abzan Charm's power 3 or greater or Temur Charm's power 3 or less, board-wide combat math effects like Jeskai Charm's +1/+1 and lifelink, Mardu Charm's slightly strange "make two guys and give them first strike until end of turn" mode, but whether this charm is simple enough VS those to remain common is at least a discussion.
DeleteI think it would eventually come down to the rest of the set's complexity. In a low complexity set, I think these would be fine, but I wouldn't want to put them in a set like Theros or Khans with a lot of moving parts in complex mechanics like Morph and Bestow.
There is always the option to push things down in rarity if it is really necessary for the set. For example, Stitcher's Apprentice is obviously an uncommon, but was printed at common. It still feels pretty weird to me when they do that, though, and they don't do it super often, only when the set really needs it (usually for developmental reasons).
DeleteI have a hard time imagining why a set would need a whole cycle of charms at common, but it could happen. None of this is to say it isn't a neat charm, I think it is a great start!
We can also see a vertical charm cycle in a single color. Finding three comprehension-friendly common charm effects can be easier than fifteen, and in a set where black is spooky... three spooky charms could be just right.
DeleteDoesn't fit the challenge, but the second art immediately made me think of this:
ReplyDeleteGruesome Mutilation {B}
Enchantment - Aura (C)
Enchant Creature
Enchanted Creature gets -1/-1 and has intimidate.
As for an actual submission:
Mark of Malice B
[Art #1]
Sorcery (C)
Creatures you control get +1/+0 until end of turn.
Dark Art (As an additional cost to cast CARDNAME you may exile a creature card from your graveyard. If you do, copy this spell.)
Love Gruesome Mutilation, fits perfectly even if not for this challenge.
DeleteVivet's Inquiry BB
ReplyDeleteSorcery - (C)
Choose two creatures target player controls. That player sacrifices one of those creatures.
"Tell me Chandra, which man do you truly love?"
(Art 1)
DeleteThis is really cool. "Which of your children will you save?" I'm just wondering whether players will have the right intuition about what happens when the targeted player only has one creature.
DeleteHmm... I had intended it to not be castable in that case, but I see when I went and tightened up the template by having it target the player instead of the creatures that may have stopped working.
DeleteI wanted to avoid "Choose two target creatures with the same controller, that player chooses..." because that sounded overly Melviny (and not necessarily common). I'm totally open for suggestions on templating!
"Choose two creatures target player controls. If exactly two creatures are chosen this way, that player sacrifices one of those creatures."
DeleteNice idea, if it's rules workable. Ends up somewhere between an Edict and a Doom Blade when they have 3+ guys.
DeleteCannibalize suggests that "Choose two target creatures controlled by the same player. That player..." can work. I think this effect is simple enough that it can be common.
ReplyDeleteYeah I think it is fine, I just outsmarted myself thinking I'd come up with a more elegant template. I think it is fine to be:
DeleteVivet's Inquiry BB
Sorcery (C)
Choose two target creatures controlled by the same player. That player sacrifices one of them.
"Tell me Chandra, which man do you truly love?"
(Still Art 1)
I know this template is more elegant, but I feel that adding targeting clause to the spell somewhat defeats the goal of "sacrifice" instead of "destroy", that is exactly being able to interact with creatures with hexproof/protection.
DeleteI agree that is often a bonus of sacrifice, but I don't think it is necessary in this design.
DeleteNecromancer’s Call B
ReplyDeleteSorcery (common - second art)
As an additional cost to cast Necromancer’s Call, exile a creature card from your graveyard.
Put a 2/2 black Zombie creature token onto the battlefield tapped.
Flashback B (You may cast this card from your graveyard for its flashback cost. You must also pay additional costs. Then exile it.)
Reminder text from Gaze of Justice:
Delete(You may cast this card from your graveyard for its flashback cost and any additional costs. Then exile it.)
As for the card, compare it to Vile Rebirth. Seems like a fine riff.
Yeah, didn't know about Gaze of Justice. This design, as you noted, actually ended up as very similar to Vile Rebirth, but it's interesting to know I started top-down from the first name I thought by looking at that art. Interesting.
DeleteRitual at Midnight, {2}{B}
ReplyDeleteSorcery, common (Sandara art)
Return up to one target creature card from your graveyard to your hand.
Put a 1/1 black Spirit creature token with flying onto the battlefield.
A tweak on Recover, replacing the extra card with a 1/1 flier (a bit later in the game than a 1/1 will normally be useful). That's why I hope 3 mana rather than 4 is okay here.
Um. Just realised I accidentally designed Cadaver Imp. Oops.
DeleteMaking 1/1 Spirits is such a white thing it feels a little weird here. Maybe with a cost of WB?
DeleteNothing wrong with designing Cadaver Imp... it's a good design!
DeleteSandara art
ReplyDeleteWitch's Entreaty 3BR
Sorcery (Rare)
Reveal the top card of your library. You may pay 1 life, put that card on the bottom of your library, and repeat this process.
Put X 1/1 black and red Demon creature tokens named Minor Devil onto the battlefield, where X is the last revealed card’s converted mana cost.
The challenge specified common. (Which was an evil trick, Jay. Which is itself I guess on-theme...)
DeleteDangit. Read the Friendly Challenge. Back to the drawing board.
DeleteWitch's Banishment 3B
DeleteInstant (Common)
Target player sacrifices a creature. Exile all cards from that player’s graveyard.
(Art #2)
ReplyDeleteVital Harvest 4BB
Sorcery (C)
Deal 1 damage to target creature or player for each creature card in your graveyard, you gain life equal to the damage dealt this way.
“The trick is leaving just enough life that they’re aware of the horrors they helped feed.”
—Vixdil, Quintessence Weaver
Hallow Summons 1B
ReplyDeleteInstant
Exile target noncreature card in a graveyard.
Put a 1/1 black Spirit creature token onto the battlefield with protection from the exiled card.
I like the design, but I feel "protection from the exiled card" may be too weird at common. That said, they printed Crypsis last year, so I guess it could be doable. It's I just hate Protection with all my heart: such an unintuitive, complicated, unelegant mechanic, I just cringe every time I see a card with it. They should absolutely retire it, and introduce one or more substitute mechanics within the same space. (sorry for the rant, it's just...)
DeleteDid you mean "protection from the name of the exiled card"? Since currently in the rules it's impossible to have protection from a specific object but not other objects that share its qualities.
DeleteAlso, agreed with P for Pizza that this isn't common.
I definitely agree re: protection. I just wish we had short-word ways of saying much simpler protectionesque concepts in Magic. The fact that this exiles the card (so you can exile the card under the token) hopefully simplifies things, as you have a clear referent as to what can't hit it. Protection does do some work here as it protects against Bolt and Pyroclasm equally - (while still being unprotected against creatures/any amount of variety in a removal suite/being outclassed). But, trying to be simpler:
DeleteHallow Summons 1B
Instant
Exile target noncreature card in a graveyard.
Put a 1/1 black Spirit creature token onto the battlefield. It can't be the target of spells with the same name as the exiled card.
Brutal Deformity 3BB
ReplyDeleteEnchantment (C)
Enchant Creature
Enchanted creature gets -2/-2 and its activated abilities can't be activated unless its controller pays 2 life.
From the second crop. I imagined what it would represent having your mouth dark-magiced out of your face, unable to speak, unable to see...
I was thinking about the trend to have expensive and situational common removal for limited, and how to make that slightly less unpalatable. Obviously this isn't ever constructed playable while <=3 cost unconditional removal exists. But it has two different minor upsides that fit the concept, it's not always worse than pacifism or doomblade, because it can kill small creatures bypassing regeneration etc, and place _some_ limit on activated abilities.
I like where you are going. I think you can just say "activated abilities can't be activated" to make this a big Viper's Kiss. (I originally didn't think that Black could do this, but apparently it can!)
DeleteAlso, just aesthetically, I think it feels more like a deformity if it isn't square. I think I would go for -3/-2.
cute art:
ReplyDeletePainfull Wish XBB
sorcery
You may only use black mana for X, and X can't be 0
Search your card for costing X. You may cast that card without paying its mana cost.
It does need a better name tough. I'm so bad at naming things
DeleteAnd i forgot it shoudl be a common, because this is more likely a rare
DeleteThis is a tutor that is disproportionately strong in broken, fast-mana combo decks. It's straight-up actual Demonic Tutor in Legacy, at least. It might not have the equivalent effect of Treasure Cruise in Modern, as the black is much more painful, but I'd be wary. Definitely a card you could sell packs with; but a potentially-overpowered-rare, not a common.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteShattered Jaw 2B
ReplyDeleteSorcery (C)
Target player discards two cards. If that player has no cards in hand, they lose two life.
"The comeback died in his throat."
Rakshasa's Secret makes me think it's okay to do Mind Rot 's with upside. This one makes the best way to play it obvious, and isn't completely dead if you're both topdecking.
Question: Is this supposed to be "They discard 2, then if they have no hand they also lose 2 life"? or is it supposed to be "They discard 2. If they couldn't, instead they lose 2 life."? I'm guessing the first, but I was to be sure.
DeleteThe first. I wasn't sure if "Then" was used in card wordings. Interested in hearing what people have to say about the power creep though.
DeleteThis is weird and probably messes with the game balance and with the rules, but...
ReplyDeleteDeath Incantation 1B
Sorcery
Scare B(You may cast this from your deck at any time for its scare cost. This cost is increased by 1 for each card in your hand)
Destroy target creature
This uses the first art.
why did Suvnica stop?
ReplyDeleteI think zefferal was too busy to keep doing it. Also, now that Tesla is moving forward it might not be a good idea to build a second set at the same time. But I'd like to see Suvnica continued eventually too-- there were some really interesting ideas there.
DeleteI do too. I think that we already have some good ideas but need to narrow down what we have.
DeleteEdit: More than some good ideas
Voldaren's Flame BR
ReplyDeleteSorcery (Common)
CARDNAME deals 1 damage to each creature your opponents control. You gain life equal to the damage dealt this way.
Using the first art, of course. Which is awesome, by the way.
I can do the renders this week. Midnight Eastern time on Sunday night as usual.
DeleteUsing the second art:
ReplyDeleteSurprise Zombie 2B
Instant (Common)
Exile target creature card from a graveyard.
Put a 2/2 black Zombie creature token onto the battlefield.
"Are you sure she's dead?"
------------------------------------------------
Looking though gatherer it looks like it's pretty similar to Beckon Apparition, and comparing the two it seems like this might be a bit overcosted. It also seems similar to Pizza's Necromancer’s Call (didn't I make something similar to his last time I was here?) but this is more of a combat trick compared to Call's efficient creatures.
This is literally Vile Rebirth for 2B instead of B. I don't think the original saw much play even for Limited, and this will see even less.
DeleteArgh. Ignore my submission then.
DeleteIt's still a decent concept to fiddle around with. Perhaps changing the size of the token, or giving it an ability, or something?
DeleteFor example, giving it Deathtouch could be interesting.
DeleteForbidden Knowledge
ReplyDelete0
Sorcery
(Color Indicator: Black)
Draw a card and lose 1 life. Then, draw X cards and lose X life, where X is equal to the number of cards named Forbidden Knowledge in all graveyards.
The cute art. I don't think the creepy art is printable, though I wouldn't have thought Sensory Deprivation's art would be printable, either.
Ran some math to make sure this wasn't too good. I don't think it is.
Delete1st: +0 cards, -1 life
2nd: +1 cards, -3 life
3rd: +3 cards, -6 life
4th: +6 cards, -10 life
Odds of casting 1 of these on turn 1: 33.6%
Odds of casting 2 of these on turn 1: 07.6%
Odds of casting 3 of these on turn 1: 01.2%
Odds of casting 4 of these on turn 1: 00.1%
(And that's *counting* the extra draws you get from successfully resolving this.)
I mean, Accumulate Knowledge is/was insanely good. Changing the cost from 2 mana to 1 life actually makes matters worse, even though the cost now kinda scales with the card. Even at 2 mana, this card is probably still probably really playable in standard and modern.
DeleteChanging from {0} to {B} to avoid busting Legacy, where absolutely every combo deck would want to run 4 of these.
DeleteI'd prefer "in your graveyard" to avoid a constructed format degenerating into everyone playing 4 of these and suddenly people are drawing 5 cards for one mana. It also agrees better with modern templating to only count your graveyard.
DeleteDo you mean lose 2*X life? I'm not following how you're getting your numbers. This is how many cards you should draw off each one, I think:
Delete1: 1 card, 1 life
2: 2 cards, 2 life
3: 3 cards, 3 life
4: 4 cards, 4 life
The life payment and the number of cards is always just the number you've cast so far?
(Jeff Young art)
ReplyDeleteHideous Visage 2B
Sorcery (C)
Creatures you control gain intimidate until end of turn.
Renders are posted.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Ipaulsen.
Delete