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.
Design a card for this art that will please one or more significant audiences, yet doesn't appeal to you at all. If that sounds crazy, identify a kind of cards you don't enjoy, then design something the people who do enjoy that kind of card would.
Thanks to Jules for the challenge idea.
For the ruthless-efficiency EDH crowd:
ReplyDeleteDig For Answers. 2BG
Sorcery
Dig For Answers can't be countered.
Search your library for a card and exile it. You may cast that card as though it was in your hand, and it can't be countered.
Dangerous Trek 1R
ReplyDeleteSorcery - (R/M?)
Flip a coin. If you win the flip, take an extra turn after this one. If you lose the flip, you lose the game.
----
I think that, to a one, I hate coin flipping cards, but they certainly have their fans. Adding to that, the fact that this is basically reprinting Time Walk will get a lot of people excited. Of course, my brain keeps spinning with ways to make this a card I'd like more, but, well, that would defeat the point of the challenge!
Pretty close to Final Fortune. A nice spin, especially for a krark's thumb deck.
DeleteThere's swingy, too swingy, way too swingy, and then this card.
DeleteCan you Sundial of the Infinite in response to finding out the result of the flip? I don't think you can, but that would make it potentially playable in the Final Fortune deck.
DeleteYou can't. It all happens during the resolution of the spell.
DeleteI'm sure it is not too powerful, but I think it will appeal to the right player. It is definitely the love child of Final Fortune and Stitch in Time (two cards I will never play).
DeleteStalwart Spelunker
ReplyDelete3G
Creature - Human Shaman Ally (R)
2/3
Spells your opponents cast that target an Ally you control cost 1 more for each Ally you control.
///
1. I've never had a great appreciation for linear strategies, especially those of the tribal variety.
2. While I would like to see an adoption of Frost Titan/Icefall Regent's "spellshroud" rather than Hexproof, I have grown progressively more disenchanted with any of the various mechanics that inhibit non-combat interaction.
Combining the two has yielded this unsightly creation.
I'd expect to see this in blue rather than green. Otherwise, very solid design!
DeleteConsidering Hexproof started in green to protect its fatties, I felt it made the most sense to have this in green to protect your allied forces. Plus, color-coded artwork and all that.
DeleteLegacy sideboard cards don't interest me at all. That being said:
ReplyDeleteWalking in Circles (rare)
GG
Enchantment
Flash
Players can't search libraries for land cards other than basic Forests.
I think this template needs some tweaking, because otherwise it would prevent me from Demonic Tutoring for an Island, but that is unenforcable.
Delete"If a player would search a library for a card, that player reveals that card. If that card is a land card other than a basic Forest, exile it."
DeleteBeautiful! Though I think instead of "would search" it should just be "searches" since you aren't replacing the search.
DeleteI think he might be correct in his templating, as it is in some sense asking players to "replace" hidden searches with revealed searches.
DeleteBut I suppose it may be better as a "Whenever..." clause and then the restriction clause. That is:
Whenever a player searches their library for a card, that player reveals that card.
Players can't search libraries for lands cards other than basic Forests.
As an aside, I presume this is meant to be anti-fetch tech, but somehow that doesn't quite seem like something best suited to green.
The GG cost and nonbasic hosing essentially pidgeonholes this into Enchantress. Seeing as this is an enchantment, it works out, but the deck is basically dead (and was never a tier 1 deck in the first place) so I see the audience for this card being very narrow.
DeletePlunder the Tombs
ReplyDelete3BB
Sorcery - Rare
Choose a card type. Each player returns all cards of the chosen type from his or her graveyard to his or her hand, then exiles the rest.
Anything that is even remotely near Yawgmoth's Will or a storm enabler makes me really antsy, but I know that some people live to try to break those kinds of cards.
I think this might be more of a {B}{G} design - mass graveyard recursion is pretty black, but it tends to be limited to creatures. Choosing a card type is generally more green.
DeleteCreeping Renaissance points this toward BG space as well. Just call it Scavenge the Tombs instead, I suppose.
DeleteBeckon Deeper 2(U/B)
ReplyDeleteSorcery (C)
Target player reveals cards from the top of his or her library until he or she reveals a land card, then puts those cards into his or her graveyard.
3G: Put Beckon Deeper from your graveyard on top of your library.
Attempts to appeal to:
-Players who like mill decks
-Players who like to self-mill (unsure if costing at 1(U/B) would make Oops All Spells too threatening...)
-Players who like wedge themes
This seems grossly underpowered. I'd make the second ability go directly to the hand, since it only mills 2-3 cards anyway.
DeleteI like those things! As of now it reads weak, especially to a self-miller (outside of Oops All Spells). Can it put the land in hand like Treasure Hunt? I think the costing is fine then, and there's appeal and interesting decisions to make whether I target myself or an opponent. Does that make sense?
DeleteThe primary effect is supposed to be the "grind" mechanic exactly, and putting only one revealed card into hand seems a bit weird.
DeleteChanging the mana cost to UB (much harder for Oops to cast, since they only run 4 Chrome Mox and 4 Lotus Petal as blue sources). Changing the activated ability to G: Return to hand. If only 2-3 cards are getting milled per cast, getting to recast this every/every other turn doesn't seem like too much of an issue.
I'll do renders this week.
ReplyDeleteBanish to the Tunnels 1WU
ReplyDeleteSorcery (R)
Target player reveals his or her sideboard. Choose one of those cards. That player cannot play spells that share a name with that card for the remainder of the match.
--
Sideboards are almost irrelevant to me as I never play constructed formats that aren't kitchen-sinkish. Dislike white rule-setting cards in general, but yeah, there's an audience that would play the hell out of this every first game of every match.
I'm not sold on WU. Possibly Mono-W, possibly WB.
This is an awfully high cost to pay for a card that does nothing in the game you cast it in (and does actual nothing in game 3). Assuming that match-matters effects can be black-bordered, I do like how this neatly sidesteps the concede in response problem.
DeleteMisdirection on this would be hilarious.
Counterpoint: Misdirection on anything is usually hilarious.
DeleteNot a big fan of tournaments because of deck consistency...
ReplyDeletePlunder the Catacombs [1B]
Sorcery [rare]
Choose a card in your graveyard. Search your library for a card with the same name and reveal it. Put both of those cards into your hand, then shuffle your library.
Exile Plunder the Catacombs.
Neat design
DeleteSeems very strong. I would make this a proto-demonic tutor, and exile one of the two cards.
DeleteThis is far stronger than Regrowth, which spent some time on banned lists. I think this probably should cost at least 2BB.
DeleteWhat if instead of putting the two revealed cards into your hand like Demonic Tutor + Regrowth, it put them on top of the library like Vampiric Tutor + Reclaim? I also think it should cost Black and Green, but that's only if you want to have it cost three or less mana.
DeleteI'm glad if my cost is way off. It means it's a card I can't evaluate well because I don't play these kind of effects, telling me I've managed to meet the challenge: design a card I wouldn't play but others would.
DeleteOriginally it was BG, but I didn't see the need to make it Green. Mono-black felt right too.
Nich is definitely right about the Green. I was too thrown off by the cost. I think 2BG is a very aggressive costing. (and aesthetically is the sum of the costs of Regrowth and Demonic Tutor).
DeleteJoin the Deeps 1U
ReplyDeleteInstant - (r)
Destroy target creature. Its controller reveals cards from their library until they reveal a creature card, then shuffles the rest of the revealed cards into their library.
That player puts that card onto the battlefield, then that creature losses all abilities and has base power and toughness 3/3.
--
I'm really not the fan of blue Rapid Hybridization effects, blue polymorph effects, or the phrase "base power and toughness". But I assume the audience for the first two is pretty large, as they come back regularly enough.
What is the purpose of polymorphing if you're just getting a vanilla 3/3? I guess there's blink effects, but it seems like a lot of shuffling for not a lot of increase in interesting gameplay.
DeleteHow many players will catch that ETB abilities trigger before the spell makes the creature lose all abilities?
You could double down on the Rapid Hybridization effect and then just give them a token? Plus, you throw a bone to the mill enthusiast.
DeleteJoin the Depths
Destroy target creature. Its controller reveals cards from the top of his or her library until a creature card is revealed, puts those cards into his or her library, then puts a 3/3 black Wraith creature token onto the battlefield.
I like Join the Depths at UB, but I suppose that's part of the problem. Adding the black completely stops it from breaking the color pie.
DeleteAlso I can't believe I typo'd "loses" in the original post. Not sure how to fix this to make both sides matter and still be "for this audience" rather than "for me".
Maybe the solution is to make some sort of enchantment-based thing? My reading of the initial design's flavor/concept is that someone has gone down into the depths and returned as a 3/3 something-or-other, but the combination of polymorphing and P/T setting makes the execution of that story a bit confusing (and oh god, the shuffling).
DeleteSo perhaps it could merge with a Dovescape-styled concept:
Transformative Depths
3U
Enchantment (R)
When CARDNAME enters the battlefield, you may exile target creature.
Whenever a player casts a creature spell with the same name as the exiled creature, counter that spell. That player may put a creature card from their hand onto the battlefield. If they do, that creature's base power and toughness becomes equal to the exiled creature's base power and toughness.
I'm not sure such an idea actually helps. Maybe the best piece of advice is just that you shouldn't be forcing yourself to design something that hits each of those targeted elements.
Thanks for the feedback! That's a pretty neat card, though I feel like it should probably be either an artifact, or green (though that's how I feel about a lot of polymorphing). Through a long route though, I started with this:
DeleteWell of Deep Pools 1 W/U
Enchantment (r)
As ~ enters the battlefield, name a card.
Creatures with the chosen name lose all abilities and have base power and toughness 1/1.
And got to this:
Find the Deep End U
Instant (r)
Destroy target creature. An opponent chooses one:
• That creature’s controller puts a 3/3 blue Fish creature token onto the battlefield.
• That creature’s controller reveals cards from the top of their library until they reveal a creature card. The player puts that card onto the battlefield, then puts the other revealed cards into their graveyard.
Intentional that the opponent chooses what will happen to the creature before knowing which creature is being targeted?
DeleteIs that how that works? I feel like every week I learn new things about how timing and layers work in Magic. Also, for what it's worth, I know the colon should be an em dash, but it definitely breaks the line better in MSE this way.
DeleteDown The Rabbit Hole 3UB
ReplyDeleteSorcery (M)
Search target player's library for a nonland card and exile it. That player may let you cast that card without paying its mana cost. If he or she does, that player shuffles their library. If not, repeat this process.
This is the dark love child of bribery and haunting echoes. Not only does it punish players trying to do big things, but also the boredom of analysis paralysis. It also is a very unfun process to watch in multiplayer. But I'd imagin this design would still have its fans
This is supposed to say "target opponent", right?
DeleteYep!
DeleteDown The Rabbit Hole 3UB
Sorcery (M)
Search target opponent's library for a nonland card and exile it. That player may let you cast that card without paying its mana cost. If he or she does, that player shuffles their library. If not, repeat this process.
I think this is way too good at totally shutting down many strategies. All of your points about why you don't like it are, to me, points that it should not be printed rather than points that it doesn't fit your style as a player.
DeleteI mean we could make it less effecient
DeleteDown The Rabbit Hole 5UB
Sorcery (M)
Search target opponent's library for a nonland card and exile it. That player may let you cast that card without paying its mana cost. If he or she does, that player shuffles their library. If not, repeat this process.
Now it's worse against midrange strategies, because you're never getting actual value out of it.
That is definitely the old school WOTC answer "This isn't fun, lets cost it unaggressively enough that no one plays it." I'd rather be more proactive in making sure this isn't played and not print it. I'd much rather print Praetor's Grasp with the Daxos clause.
DeleteEven though It's not a card I'd like, I know people that love these types of cards. I'm not convined that the effect is really just bad design. Why do you think that?
DeleteThe only cards I don't enjoy are those that I consider poorly designed. In lieu of submitting something intentionally bad, I'll take an existing card I don't like and spruce it up:
ReplyDeleteMontresor
1WB
Legendary Creature -- Human
1W, T: Tap target creature.
1B, T: Destroy target tapped creature.
Proceed, herein is the Amontillado.
2/2
Render: http://i.imgur.com/bCI2DaG.jpg
This seems very well designed to me. Do you consider that a good or bad thing?
Delete:)
I assume this is a fix to Stalking Assassin? That was a nice pairing of allied effects, though painfully overcosted to activate.
DeleteI've always abhorred draw-go in standard... and this art seems perfect for a powerful card-draw spell...like a mega Treasure Hunt:
ReplyDeleteInto the Deep {X}{X}{U}
Instant (Mythic)
Reveal cards from the top of your library until you reveal X nonland cards, then put all cards revealed this way into your hand.
Thoughts? Suggestions?
This is probably fair? I don't think this is a Mythic, though, but maybe I wouldn't say that after seeing it in action!
DeleteThinking about this several times throughout today, I now think this is too good. This is nearly a strictly better Jace's Ingenuity, a card which sees significant standard play.
DeleteApparently WotC thinks Mythics are allowed to be strictly better or close enough; see Sphinx's Revelation. I see this as a Revelation but a lot swingier. For given values of X, casting Revelation:
DeleteX=1, 4 mana for 1 card
X=2, 5 mana for 2 cards
X=4, 7 mana for 4 cards
X=6, 9 mana for 6 cards
Into the Deep is always better at X=1, always at least cycling for 3 mana and potentially being an instant speed Divination or better. At X=2, assuming the deck is 1/3rd land, you should hit 1 land and 2 nonlands making this equivalent to Ingenuity. At X=3 you're paying 7 mana, which nets you 4-5 cards on average, but there's also a chance of hitting only 3 (making this a much worse Jace's Ingenuity). At X=4 you're back on par with Revelation.
Having to reveal all the cards also gives your opponent information in the control mirror, which is certainly less relevant than the fact that you just drew a bunch of cards but worse in that respect than Ingenuity/Revelation.
You didn't mention the life gain of Revelation, which was often game-changing itself.
DeleteI don’t play commander but I’m told those games can just stall out when no one is able to pay for their commander anymore. I’ve also heard red is the narrowest color to build with in the format.
ReplyDeletePast is Prologue (RAR)
1RR
Sorcery
Additional costs to cast creatures from the command zone are reset to 0.
Each player discards his or her hand, then draws four cards.
Exile Past is Prologue.
I was trying to figure out what kind of mana cost RAR was for a good few minutes there...
DeleteStorm and eggs decks literally break the game. Often, after ten minutes in the tank, the player piloting these decks just has to roll the dice and see if he's got it. Solitaire. Math. Random wins. Yup. Worse gameplay than a Stasis-lock (where you can at least look forward to your draw step).
ReplyDeleteGrafdigger's Lantern 0
Artifact
T, exile CARDNAME: return target card with converted mana cost 0 or less from a graveyard to its owner's hand.
Yuck! Now where are my lion's eye diamonds?
Flavor text: "Once, I found a broken Mana Crypt! Usually, it just leads to more dirt."
DeleteHide Underground G
ReplyDeleteInstant (U)
Hide Underground can't be countered.
Permanents you control gain hexproof until end of turn.
Things I don't like (that hopefully appeal to other players):
- Color hosers/Extremely narrow cards (that often do nothing)
- Legacy/Vintage (I don't think this is playable in Vintage though)
- Cards with bad/barely justifiable flavor (especially lacking flavortext to make up for it)
Feedback appreciated as always.
I don't think "bad flavor" is appealing to any players.
DeleteThere's a time and a place for narrow sideboard cards, but I'm skeptical that this would be prioritized in Standard, much less Legacy or Vintage (where there are tons of decks that can simply combo-kill you regardless of what permanents you have in play).
Good point on flavor. Can I change that to "pure Mels/Melvins" then, which I am not?
DeleteWhat about the following then?
Hide Underground WG
Instant (U)
You and each permanent you control gain hexproof until end of turn.
Draw a card.
Does this appeal to anyone (asking sincerely)?
Counter your Fireball to the face/Doom Blade to my sweet Watchwolf AND draw a card? Sign me up!
DeleteDarn it, I kind of like this card now. Challenges are hard.
DeleteThis next card is not my submission because it doesn't fit the art, but I feel like I should finish where I'm headed:
Hide Below W
Instant (U)
You gain hexproof until end of turn.
Draw a card.
Thoughts on this card?
I always wanted to play Gilded Light, but kept cutting it from decks. I like this version better, obviously since it's close to strictly better. I'd certainly try to put it in a deck.
DeleteCatacombs of lost souls BBB
ReplyDeleteEnchantment (r)
Whenever a creature would die, exile it with [cardname] instead.
Whenever [cardname] would leave the battlefield, put all creatures exiled with it on the battlefield
I think some people will dismis it on the spot. And others will try to to build around it.
You can use the more recent templating for this:
DeleteWhenever a creature would die, instead exile it until CARDNAME leaves the battlefield.
Not sold on this being black, let alone triple-black. Given that text, my guess would have been white or maybe blue.
Turning the creature from to opponent against them is very very black. (shit, forgot to mention that)
DeleteI was also thinking about the new templating, but I think there will be confusion of where the creatures will go if CARDNAME leaves the battlefield. As the first effect is a replacement effect, it does not trigger, so there are no wierd effect of staying exiled. (and even if so, it does not as often matter as with Oblivion Ring)
So let's change it a little bit:
Lompe LuitenApril 19, 2015 at 5:51 AM
Catacombs of lost souls 1BB
Enchantment (r)
Whenever a creature would die, exile it with [cardname] instead.
Whenever [cardname] would leave the battlefield, put all creatures exiled with it on the battlefield under your control
Cannibalism 3BB
ReplyDeleteEnchantment (R)
Whenever a creature enters the battlefield, destroy it unless its controller exiles a creature card from his or her graveyard.
"You eat what you are."
I hate not casting my spells, but a number of griefer Timmies/Tammies love nothing more than watching their opponents squirm. I didn't pull this off as well as Illusory Gains, but that's the intended sort of gameplay.
I do like that this feeds itself, so if you have two creatures you can toss one out to feed the second. (As opposed to, "as an additional cost to cast, or something like that, I suppose).
DeleteI might consider adding some sort of Bloodthrone Vampire type ability? It dilutes the flavor but I just feel like I'm wanting something a little more from the card. Maybe giving all creatures the ability, or just "Sacrifice a creature: Another target creature gets +2/+2 until end of turn. Any player may activate this ability."? This also lets me trade in the Runeclaw Bears I have in play for the Dragon I'm about to cast without pitching a card first - but that might be too ungrieferly for the challenge.
...but I think that could allow you to sac in response to the destroy trigger, which is neither obvious enough to new players nor in the spirit of the card. Maybe: "At the beginning of each player’s upkeep, that player may sacrifice a creature. If he or she does, another target creature gets +2/+2 until end of turn."
I dislike cards that staple together a lot of different and not very related abilities. But experience has shown that they can appeal to plenty of Spike and Timmy players. Here's a new style of card that would probably fall into that category-- a kind of build-your-own-Morphling.
ReplyDeleteLight of Elbereth 3
Artifact- Equipment (Rare)
Equip 1
1: Equipped creature gets +1/+1 until end of turn.
W: Equipped creature gains vigilance until end of turn.
W: Equipped creature gains protection from the color of your choice until end of turn.
Art focused on the lantern please, if it's possible and if I'm in time for the renders.
DeleteWhy does the creature get +1/+1, not +1/-1 as on morphling?
DeleteBecause +1/+1 is a better fit with White's color pie and more powerful, and because +1/-1 with -1/+1 takes up more text area.
DeleteTutors have never really been a card that I have been a fan of playing. I know they are powerful but as a timmy/spike the idea of taking a turn off to do something cool next doesn't appeal to me compared to just consistently doing cool things every turn.
ReplyDeleteThis card showcases the premonition mechanic that I've been using in Dreamscape and was recently talked about for Tesla.
Prophetic Depths {3BB}
Sorcery (Rare)
Search your library for a card and put that card into your hand. Then shuffle your library.
Premonition 5—{1B} (Rather than cast this card from your hand, you may pay {1B} and put this card into your library face up beneath the top five cards. If it reaches the top, cast it for free instead.)
Also this next card doesn't fit the art but showcases another subset of cards that don't excite me.
Super spiky legacy powered free mana cards are something I that don't excite me in the slightest. Yet when I created the following card for my custom set Dreamscape some of my friends have told me it is their favorite card in the set. Which surprised me.
Foretold Mox
Artifact (Mythic)
{T}: Add one mana of any color to your mana pool.
Premonition 3—{0} (Rather than cast this card from your hand, you may pay {0} and put this card into your library face up beneath the top three cards. If it reaches the top, cast it for free instead.)
Great challenge idea!
ReplyDelete"doesn't appeal to me at all"? Sounds likely to be a green, black, or green-black card, probably focused on recursion or repetitive game state, probably using hexproof or otherwise hard to get rid of. Appealing to grindy Spikes, griefer Timmies, the kind of player who likes card advantage and inevitability without caring if it makes the opponent groan in frustration.
Now let's see the art? Wow, yes, that fits "green-black recursive" very well indeed. Probably not hexproof, but still.
First attempt (not my submission):
Tomb of the Disquiet
Land (rare)
{T}: Add {1} to your mana pool.
{2}{G}{B}, {T}: Return target card from your graveyard to your hand.
{5}{G}{B}, {T}: Return target creature card from your graveyard to the battlefield.
Being a land makes it harder to interact with, which makes it more popular with significant amounts of people while making it appeal to me less.
Considering formats: Limited: Strong but probably not problematically so. Standard: Slow and grindy, would need a GB control deck to take advantage. EDH: Perhaps a bit too good as it's basically an auto-throw-in in any GB deck that can afford the colourless land.
Second attempt (let's say this is my submission for now):
Effulgence of Vigor
Enchantment, 3GB, rare
At the end of each turn, choose target creature card in a graveyard that was put there this turn. You may pay {2}{G}{B}. If you do, return that card to the battlefield under your control. Otherwise, if it's in your graveyard, return it to your hand.
The kind of steady stream of reanimation that makes Sheoldred so popular (to many) and so hated (to me).
Considering formats: Limited: Again, decent but not spectacular due to high costs. It's no Sheoldred or Debtors' Knell. Good in a format where creatures can be discarded for some effect like cycling. Standard: I could see it seeing occasional play in a kill-heavy control deck. EDH: As far as I can tell I think the kind of people I'm targeting would enjoy it a lot, though I'd groan to see it hit the table across from me.
The first design is probably more appealing to my target audience, but being a land makes it so hard to balance, so I'll go for the second.
My instinct is that this is overpowered, but it is not so different from Asceticism, so it may be fine.
DeleteI expect the land is significantly overpowered because, as you say, lands are hard to balance.
As to the design, it is in a neat space, but I think Deadbridge Chant does everything this does but in a way I enjoy more as a player and a designer.
DeleteOoh yes, Asceticism, there's another card I really hate :->
DeleteI'll certainly agree Deadbridge Chant is more interesting and fun. That's the problem: it's one of the very unusual subset of green-black recursive cards that I actually enjoy! I couldn't submit Deadbridge Chant for this, because it's too much fun - it manages to appeal to me despite ticking many of my disapproval boxes :)
Plausibly {2}{B}{G} is too expensive for the trigger. It could probably be 2 or 3 mana instead. Especially given the "put there this turn" restriction. Yeah, let's take that trigger cost down to {1}{B}{G} at least.