I initially had the Beeble at just U. It does have flash, so that's some upside right there. It's really not intended to be included on its own merit, but as support. Adding draw a card on entry would be too much in my opinion, perhaps on death? That would make it a reasonable inclusion in non-combo decks, allowing you to swap a dead card from your hand for a new one.
Yup, I'd go with this.
I love the name of Violent Uprising given what it does. Well done.
Ivory Demon: Why go the Demon route? I could easily see this as an Angel. Although that would require you to include flying and perhaps that's not an option.
Maybe include flying for Golden Goose. It's green so maybe your inclined not to, so perhaps a blue or white activated cost giving in flying until end of turn then.
[card]Magistrate of Suffering 1B
Creature - Vampire
Menace
At beginning of your end step, if you lost life, put +1/+1 counter here.
1/1[/card] I might tinker on it a bit, but it will mostly stay that way.
I'll post some green cards next.
Disclaimer: I do not own any of the images used on the cards.
I wanted to do something different with Chittering Rats which was Acolyte of Dusk's inspiration. But you're all right, I did thought the soft-lock is annoying at best and a one-card win-con at worst. I'll think of something for the second ability.
Ashmount Acolyte is designated at the 3cmc spot so I need to keep the cost. I just though 1BB is to good. It is part of a monocolored deck anyway.
I'll change Medeia's 2nd ability to "BBB, Discard a card: Each opponent discards a card." That limits it so you can't just spam it with nothing in your hand. Why I didn't thought of that, I don't know.
Magistrate of Suffering was initially:
<Name> 1B
Creature - Vampire
3: Gains flying
At beginning of your end step, if you lost life, put +1/+1 counter here.
2/1
I wanted a non-flying ability that's why I changed it. Perhaps I could revert it back to this.
I'll add a tap ability for the Battlefield Misinformant.
I'm creating a Battlechest that's a collection of 25 decks. The decks are meant to be played against each other by two players or more. Each player will pick a deck from the 25 then battle it out.
There are 25 decks because there are 2 for each two-color combination (20 decks) plus 1 monocolor deck for each color (5 decks). Decks are played as is with no sideboarding. I try very hard to balance all 25 decks making sure no deck stand taller than the others.
Every deck has 2-4 custom cards I created. I won't show all on this post. But I'll show the black cards first. These cards do not necessarily belong on the same deck.
Any comments on the cards would be appreciated.
Thanks.
Disclaimer: I do not own any of the images used on the cards.
Merlo of Magic :3mana::symw::symu::symg::symb::symr:
Legendary Creature - Human Wizard
T: Add :symw::symu::symb::symr::symg: to your mana pool.
:symw:: Target creature gets +1/+1 and gains lifelink until end of turn.
:symu:: Target creature gets -1/+5 and gains flying until end of turn.
:symb:: Target creature gets +4/-2 and haste until end of turn.
:symr:: Target creature gets +2/+0 and trample until end of turn.
:symg:: Target creature gets +0/+3 and vigilance until end of turn.
6/7
Can you imagine the math if the five abilities are targeted on one creature? Cards should be elegant in design and concept.
If creature enhancement is what your after why not try some of these:
:symtap:: Put a creature from your hand into the battlefield.
:4mana:: Target attacking or blocking creature gets +2/+2 and is indestructible until end of turn.
I agree with some posts however that Merlin should be primarily a instant/sorcery expert instead of creatures.
I currently have a Starcraft duel decks in the works. This is perfect place for a preview.
Terran Marine :symrw::symrw:
Creature - Human Soldier
Double Strike
:symr::symr:: +1/-1 until end of turn.
"Go, go, go!"
1/2
Terran Firebat :1mana::symr::symr:
Creature - Human Soldier
Whenever Terran Firebat attacks, you may have it deal damage equal to its power to target creature without flying.
:symr::symr:: +1/-1 until end of turn.
Balance 2/8: The effect could potentially become a one-sided Evacaution. And that is too powerful even with a mandatory condition that the creatures should be blocking. If memory serves there is no card that returns all blocking creatures. The closest is Trial of Trial/Error and it only returns one. Creativity 4/5: Not much cards out there that returns blocking creatures to owner's hand. I know, i've searched Gatherer. It has been done before, but never in a large scale like this. Flavor 5/5: The effect is very much blue since it's bounce. Cowardice (the card) is in fact blue. Burst means the creatures were brave to start with then - surprise! - they start running off the battlefield. Perfect. Templating 2/2: Worded just about right. Score: 13/20
Duel
Balance 6/8: The concept is nice. Its combo card will be none other than: Unsummon. With an extra U this card becomes Chord of Calling minus the convoke. Green does it, so why not blue/white. In limited its a risky bomb. Risky because its a potential 'end game' card when the right creature is tutored by any of the players. Creativity 5/5: Quite creative, impressively so. Two creatures direct from the ranks dueling it out for a chance to continue the fight to the end! Hey, that could be the flavored text since you don't have any. Flavor 1/5: I really, really think white is not the color of choice. I'm sure red probably crossed your mind, but i'm wondering why you sided to white? First, red is more of the initiator compared to white. Second, Tahngarth, Talruum Hero is red. Finally, red is the risk taker and this spell still has a level of risk for white's tastes. The name is perfect, undoubtedly, but color pie issues take precedence in flavor. Templating 0/2: You missed out on two points: I think it should target an opponent rather than just a player. And it should say "Both players shuffle their libraries". Score: 12/20
Sudden Transposition
Balance 3/8: Dude, your card is quite a handful. I swear it gave me a headache after reading it for the first time. But i get it, i get it, i think. Okay, here goes: The only time this spell is actually beneficial is when the caster is the defending player and both creatures are attacking him/her. That way defending player takes less (or none) combat damage and a chance both or one creature dies. Also, it isn't clear where the surviving creature/s that was targeted end up after the combat. If caster ends up stealing a creature (or two) after combat, then this card is over-powered at UUU. If not, at worst this card lessens combat damage or at best it destroys two creatures (by having the two creatures destroy each other) of the opponent. Creativity 2/5: Its too clutered for my tastes. There should be a better, simpler way of stating what you want the spell to achieve. Flavor 3/5: Blue definitely has the skills for this. But it feels more red and/or black. Templating 0/2: There's nothing wrong with the template since there's a reminder text of what exactly combat positions mean. Although if the reminder texts need additional reminders then its not as elegant as it should be. Score: 8/20
Psychic Punches
Balance 7/8: Mana cost is about right for the effect that is somewhat still relying on opponent's decision. It boils down to whether defending is willing to trade his creature for a card draw. +1/+0 for each card in hand may seem right since red and blue tends to empty their hand preventing a 100% chance of destroying a blocking creature, thus balancing the effect. Creativity 4/5: Very creative indeed. Haven't seen anything like this yet. Flavor 3/5: Blue/red is perfect. Not a fan of the word "punches" in the name, so minus 1 for that. Another minus 1 as I think the name is some effect that comes directly from the caster of the spell, so why does your creatures get a bonus. Those may be your creatures but it doesn't mean you and your creatures share a single mind. Same reason why i think the flavor text doens't go with the effect of the card either. I'm nitpicking, i'm sorry. Templating 2/2: I'm not a rules guru so i'm not sure if there's a better way of setting it up differently. So perfect score. Score: 16/20
Cruel Translocation
Balance 2/8: It has a potential to be too powerful. If you time it right this could very well say: You win the game. If all creatures attack, that would leave opponent defenseless on the next turn. The fact that the opponont only has less than a whole turn to something about it, it pretty much game over. Its not very fun to play with because it not fun to play against it.
Creativity 3/5: Quite creative, but the approach could be revised a little. Limiting the spell to one creature instead would have been very balanced, and very cool. Flavor 4/5: Not a fan of the name. Color is about right Templating 2/2: just about right. Score: 11/20
Chaotic Attack
Balance 3/8: Your overstating what you want the card to do. Why not just make the card say, attacking creatures you control get +1/+0 and first strike until end of turn. I mean, would you ever cast this when you have an odd number of attacking creatures? I think not. At RR, the effect is just about right however. Creativity 3/5: +1/+0 and first strike is hardly awe-inspiring in card design. But i think this is a case of over-designing (that's a word, right). Flavor 2/5: Chaotic attack is a nice name, but if you plan ahead before combat of what you'll do. It won't be as a chaotic attack anymore. Templating 0/2: I think there's case here of overstating what you want the card to achieve, here. Score: 8/20
Hearty Strength
Balance 8/8: I love it. perfectly balanced. +4 on toughness makes sure the creature has a good chance to survive. +2 on power makes gives it a chance to strike back and destroy the creature. Perfect. The free cost because of being attacked is just balanced. Since its white, i'll got for it. Creative 5/5: There have been auras with flash before. But not like this. I simply love it. And the pro red is a nice unexpected twist. Flavor 5/5: You could do better for the name but i'll take it. Color is perfect. Templating 1/2: Free spells tend to associate themselves with their color and/or basic land. ie. Play only if you control a Plains. So for this card, if you still insist on the 0 cost, it should be targeting a white creature, or played only if you control a plains. I prefer the white condition for the creature. Score :19/20
Sadomasochist
Balance 5/8: Paired with regeneration this is a lightning bolt generator. With indestructibility and Firebreathing, it becomes a lightning bolt with steroids generator. The high manacost and mandatory block keeps it in check. If you can keep it play long enough for something like regenation you can take advantage of its ability long term. Creativity 5/5: Definitely creative. a very top-down card. Maro would be proud. Flavor 5/5: Needless to say, color is perfect and so is the name. Templating 2/2 Worded ust right Score: 17/20
Ensure Fairness
Balance 3/8: I love this card, I got to say. But you could've given more thought into it. Its pretty weak. Its a card that'll be used to save your creatures, no doubt. But there are other ways of doing that that is more flexible and more powerful. My suggestion is add the Stifle effect to it then reduce to W for mana cost. Creativity 4/5: Like i said i love where this card is headed. With a few tweaks, the concept behind the card is very very creative. Flavor 5/5: White is a perfect color with blue as well. Could see it as hybrid blue/white. Name is just perfect. Templating 2/2: Worded just right, IMO. Score: 14/20
Bail Out
Balance 8/8: At one to cast, you do get what you pay for. This is more flexible than Fog since you can use it to save your creature as well but still allow other attacking creatures to inflick damage. Creativity 1/5: Well, i'm not awed so much by the design. It's fog but it isn't. It's Reconnasiance but it isn't. Low score as there are strickly better cards like it. (Fog is still better since red doesn't need this kind of effect in the first place). Don't know why it had to be tribal. Flavor 0/5: No way this is red. Blue maybe, but this has to be white. ie Reconnasiance. Besides red doesn't bail out. It sticks to its resolve and sees it through, whatever it is. That's red for you. Templating 2/2: I see nothing wrong. Score: 11/20
Pollen Fog
Balance 5/8: Zero cost spells are dangerously overpowered, IMO. Even if the effect is marginal like this one. Creativity 3/5: The combination of split second, fog, and snake vemon effect is quite novel. But for me the combination is not that compelling or awe-inspiring that it should be. Flavor 3/5: Green fits the bill, as all effects are green-aligned. making it zero casting is actually anti-flavor for the card as green is the "mana color", if you know what i mean. Templating 2/2: just about right Score 13/20
Planned Ambush
Balance 0/8: "The defending player chooses the order of defending creatures for the attacking player." - Doesn't that what the defending player actually does in the first place, without this card telling him that. Why would the attacking player have defending creatures? I think there's a mis-type here somewhere.
Creativity ?/5:
Flavor ?/5:
Templating ?/2:
Score: ?/20
Mirror Match
Balance 6/8: This spell can be used in two ways: (1) The caster of Mirror Match is the defending player. Or, (2) the caster the offensive player.
First, as the defensive player: Creature hordes take full advantage of the spell's effect. If two creatures are assigned to block one attacking creature, attacking creature is surely destroyed, in the absence of regeneration (or the like) of course. More creatures, better results.
Second, as the offensive player. Of course, creatures will be tailor-fitted for this spell's effect to be maximized. Creatures with regeneration that require an activation cost that is color depended such as "2G: Regenerate ~.' This ensures your creatures stay alive while a good chance the other doesn't.
One question arises however: What if the attacking creature has an ability "~ cannot block" or has protection from its own color? What happens then? Creativity 5/5: Very creative. I love it. Flavor 5/5: very flavorful and blue/white is a perfect fit. Couldn't think of a better name. Not a fan of the flavored text however, but i'll let it slide. Templating: 1/2: I think it should say "Blocking creatures become a copy of..." Score: 17/20
Ith's Labyrinth
Balance 4/8: Pretty complicated card for an effect that is used once: "When Ith's Labyrinth comes into play, untap target creature." I dont really know what your intial intentions are for the card, but i think you've over-thought it and ended up making complicated than it should be. Creativity 2/5: A maze made by Ith where the creature gets lost in and ends up not being able to deal damage. I'm pretty sure we've seen this before. Flavor 3/5: Love the name. Love using Ith as reference to another great card. I don't knw why you made it a one time effect, though. Made it look like the labyrinth was easy to get out to. Templating 0/2: It was mentioned twice in the card that it could only be played during combat, that's not very elegant. Score: 9/20
Reckless Ruckus
Balance 4/8: Let me see, if there are a total of even number of creatures then two players get equal amount. Since its alternate starting with active player, the active gets the slight edge. Take note of the word slight. If there are a total of odd number of creatures then the active player has a better advantage having one extra creature than the other. Its all boils down the the types of creatures in play whether this spell is a bust move or a great move when played. The wording brecomes totally obscure when there are three or more players. Creativity: 3/5: The execution could have been done better. Instead of patterning it too much to Struggle of Sanity.
Flavor 3/5: This is just complicated version of Brawl. Templating: 1/2 not as elegant as it should be. Score: 14/20
Balance 8/8: Fair gameplay is still priority: mana cost, game effect, the use of drawbacks, etc.
Creativity 5/5: Show your design skills here people, concept originality, use of existing designs, combinations, etc. And remember quantity doesn't always translate to quality
Flavor 5/5: Card name, creature type if creature, color pie issues. Plus points for a nice flavored text thrown in
Templating 2/2: No one wants a confusing card, elegance is still key.
I'll close the challenge and post the judgings if there are at least ten posters. Good luck.
Provoke, wither
Whenever Roughshod Trasher becomes blocked, regenerate it.
The roughshods take pride of hunting in the open. They prefer that their intended prey be fully aware of the incoming onslaught and the unavoidable, inevitable kill that follows.
What are cards you know that depicts an Angel or an Angel is the subject of the card art?
Needs to be:
* noncreature
* no mono-black
* the word "angel" is not in the card name
* Modern cards only
I'm planning to collect cards with Angels on the card art. Angel creatures are obvious but I was thinking there are others.
Here's what I have thus far:
-Gleam of Battle
-Warleader's Helix
-Increasing Devotion
Thanks in advance.
I love the name of Violent Uprising given what it does. Well done.
Ivory Demon: Why go the Demon route? I could easily see this as an Angel. Although that would require you to include flying and perhaps that's not an option.
Maybe include flying for Golden Goose. It's green so maybe your inclined not to, so perhaps a blue or white activated cost giving in flying until end of turn then.
Creature - Vampire
Menace
At beginning of your end step, if you lost life, put +1/+1 counter here.
1/1[/card] I might tinker on it a bit, but it will mostly stay that way.
I'll post some green cards next.
Disclaimer: I do not own any of the images used on the cards.
Ashmount Acolyte is designated at the 3cmc spot so I need to keep the cost. I just though 1BB is to good. It is part of a monocolored deck anyway.
I'll change Medeia's 2nd ability to "BBB, Discard a card: Each opponent discards a card." That limits it so you can't just spam it with nothing in your hand. Why I didn't thought of that, I don't know.
Magistrate of Suffering was initially:
I wanted a non-flying ability that's why I changed it. Perhaps I could revert it back to this.
I'll add a tap ability for the Battlefield Misinformant.
Thanks for the comments. Appreciate it.
I'll post others next.
There are 25 decks because there are 2 for each two-color combination (20 decks) plus 1 monocolor deck for each color (5 decks). Decks are played as is with no sideboarding. I try very hard to balance all 25 decks making sure no deck stand taller than the others.
Every deck has 2-4 custom cards I created. I won't show all on this post. But I'll show the black cards first. These cards do not necessarily belong on the same deck.
Any comments on the cards would be appreciated.
Thanks.
Disclaimer: I do not own any of the images used on the cards.
Can you imagine the math if the five abilities are targeted on one creature? Cards should be elegant in design and concept.
If creature enhancement is what your after why not try some of these:
I agree with some posts however that Merlin should be primarily a instant/sorcery expert instead of creatures.
Terran Marine :symrw::symrw:
Creature - Human Soldier
Double Strike
:symr::symr:: +1/-1 until end of turn.
"Go, go, go!"
1/2
Terran Firebat :1mana::symr::symr:
Creature - Human Soldier
Whenever Terran Firebat attacks, you may have it deal damage equal to its power to target creature without flying.
:symr::symr:: +1/-1 until end of turn.
"Fire it up!"
1/2
I love the Ravnica characters so I'm adding a lot from Ravnica. And design-wise the Numena are great top-down cards to make.
1) Jodah (Time Spiral, Ice Age)
2) Jarad (Ravnica)
3) Feather (Ravnica)
4) Belbe (Nemesis)
5) Urza (Urza's Saga)
6) Kuberr (Onslaught)
7) The Weaver King (Time Spiral)
8) Averru (Onslaught)
9) Lowallyn (Onslaught)
10) Crixizix (Ravnica)
Burst of Cowardice
Balance 2/8: The effect could potentially become a one-sided Evacaution. And that is too powerful even with a mandatory condition that the creatures should be blocking. If memory serves there is no card that returns all blocking creatures. The closest is Trial of Trial/Error and it only returns one.
Creativity 4/5: Not much cards out there that returns blocking creatures to owner's hand. I know, i've searched Gatherer. It has been done before, but never in a large scale like this.
Flavor 5/5: The effect is very much blue since it's bounce. Cowardice (the card) is in fact blue. Burst means the creatures were brave to start with then - surprise! - they start running off the battlefield. Perfect.
Templating 2/2: Worded just about right.
Score: 13/20
Balance 6/8: The concept is nice. Its combo card will be none other than: Unsummon. With an extra U this card becomes Chord of Calling minus the convoke. Green does it, so why not blue/white. In limited its a risky bomb. Risky because its a potential 'end game' card when the right creature is tutored by any of the players.
Creativity 5/5: Quite creative, impressively so. Two creatures direct from the ranks dueling it out for a chance to continue the fight to the end! Hey, that could be the flavored text since you don't have any.
Flavor 1/5: I really, really think white is not the color of choice. I'm sure red probably crossed your mind, but i'm wondering why you sided to white? First, red is more of the initiator compared to white. Second, Tahngarth, Talruum Hero is red. Finally, red is the risk taker and this spell still has a level of risk for white's tastes. The name is perfect, undoubtedly, but color pie issues take precedence in flavor.
Templating 0/2: You missed out on two points: I think it should target an opponent rather than just a player. And it should say "Both players shuffle their libraries".
Score: 12/20
Balance 3/8: Dude, your card is quite a handful. I swear it gave me a headache after reading it for the first time. But i get it, i get it, i think. Okay, here goes: The only time this spell is actually beneficial is when the caster is the defending player and both creatures are attacking him/her. That way defending player takes less (or none) combat damage and a chance both or one creature dies. Also, it isn't clear where the surviving creature/s that was targeted end up after the combat. If caster ends up stealing a creature (or two) after combat, then this card is over-powered at UUU. If not, at worst this card lessens combat damage or at best it destroys two creatures (by having the two creatures destroy each other) of the opponent.
Creativity 2/5: Its too clutered for my tastes. There should be a better, simpler way of stating what you want the spell to achieve.
Flavor 3/5: Blue definitely has the skills for this. But it feels more red and/or black.
Templating 0/2: There's nothing wrong with the template since there's a reminder text of what exactly combat positions mean. Although if the reminder texts need additional reminders then its not as elegant as it should be.
Score: 8/20
Balance 7/8: Mana cost is about right for the effect that is somewhat still relying on opponent's decision. It boils down to whether defending is willing to trade his creature for a card draw. +1/+0 for each card in hand may seem right since red and blue tends to empty their hand preventing a 100% chance of destroying a blocking creature, thus balancing the effect.
Creativity 4/5: Very creative indeed. Haven't seen anything like this yet.
Flavor 3/5: Blue/red is perfect. Not a fan of the word "punches" in the name, so minus 1 for that. Another minus 1 as I think the name is some effect that comes directly from the caster of the spell, so why does your creatures get a bonus. Those may be your creatures but it doesn't mean you and your creatures share a single mind. Same reason why i think the flavor text doens't go with the effect of the card either. I'm nitpicking, i'm sorry.
Templating 2/2: I'm not a rules guru so i'm not sure if there's a better way of setting it up differently. So perfect score.
Score: 16/20
Balance 2/8: It has a potential to be too powerful. If you time it right this could very well say: You win the game. If all creatures attack, that would leave opponent defenseless on the next turn. The fact that the opponont only has less than a whole turn to something about it, it pretty much game over. Its not very fun to play with because it not fun to play against it.
Creativity 3/5: Quite creative, but the approach could be revised a little. Limiting the spell to one creature instead would have been very balanced, and very cool.
Flavor 4/5: Not a fan of the name. Color is about right
Templating 2/2: just about right.
Score: 11/20
Balance 3/8: Your overstating what you want the card to do. Why not just make the card say, attacking creatures you control get +1/+0 and first strike until end of turn. I mean, would you ever cast this when you have an odd number of attacking creatures? I think not. At RR, the effect is just about right however.
Creativity 3/5: +1/+0 and first strike is hardly awe-inspiring in card design. But i think this is a case of over-designing (that's a word, right).
Flavor 2/5: Chaotic attack is a nice name, but if you plan ahead before combat of what you'll do. It won't be as a chaotic attack anymore.
Templating 0/2: I think there's case here of overstating what you want the card to achieve, here.
Score: 8/20
Balance 8/8: I love it. perfectly balanced. +4 on toughness makes sure the creature has a good chance to survive. +2 on power makes gives it a chance to strike back and destroy the creature. Perfect. The free cost because of being attacked is just balanced. Since its white, i'll got for it.
Creative 5/5: There have been auras with flash before. But not like this. I simply love it. And the pro red is a nice unexpected twist.
Flavor 5/5: You could do better for the name but i'll take it. Color is perfect.
Templating 1/2: Free spells tend to associate themselves with their color and/or basic land. ie. Play only if you control a Plains. So for this card, if you still insist on the 0 cost, it should be targeting a white creature, or played only if you control a plains. I prefer the white condition for the creature.
Score :19/20
Balance 5/8: Paired with regeneration this is a lightning bolt generator. With indestructibility and Firebreathing, it becomes a lightning bolt with steroids generator. The high manacost and mandatory block keeps it in check. If you can keep it play long enough for something like regenation you can take advantage of its ability long term.
Creativity 5/5: Definitely creative. a very top-down card. Maro would be proud.
Flavor 5/5: Needless to say, color is perfect and so is the name.
Templating 2/2 Worded ust right
Score: 17/20
Balance 3/8: I love this card, I got to say. But you could've given more thought into it. Its pretty weak. Its a card that'll be used to save your creatures, no doubt. But there are other ways of doing that that is more flexible and more powerful. My suggestion is add the Stifle effect to it then reduce to W for mana cost.
Creativity 4/5: Like i said i love where this card is headed. With a few tweaks, the concept behind the card is very very creative.
Flavor 5/5: White is a perfect color with blue as well. Could see it as hybrid blue/white. Name is just perfect.
Templating 2/2: Worded just right, IMO.
Score: 14/20
Balance 8/8: At one to cast, you do get what you pay for. This is more flexible than Fog since you can use it to save your creature as well but still allow other attacking creatures to inflick damage.
Creativity 1/5: Well, i'm not awed so much by the design. It's fog but it isn't. It's Reconnasiance but it isn't. Low score as there are strickly better cards like it. (Fog is still better since red doesn't need this kind of effect in the first place). Don't know why it had to be tribal.
Flavor 0/5: No way this is red. Blue maybe, but this has to be white. ie Reconnasiance. Besides red doesn't bail out. It sticks to its resolve and sees it through, whatever it is. That's red for you.
Templating 2/2: I see nothing wrong.
Score: 11/20
Balance 5/8: Zero cost spells are dangerously overpowered, IMO. Even if the effect is marginal like this one.
Creativity 3/5: The combination of split second, fog, and snake vemon effect is quite novel. But for me the combination is not that compelling or awe-inspiring that it should be.
Flavor 3/5: Green fits the bill, as all effects are green-aligned. making it zero casting is actually anti-flavor for the card as green is the "mana color", if you know what i mean.
Templating 2/2: just about right
Score 13/20
Balance 0/8: "The defending player chooses the order of defending creatures for the attacking player." - Doesn't that what the defending player actually does in the first place, without this card telling him that. Why would the attacking player have defending creatures? I think there's a mis-type here somewhere.
Creativity ?/5:
Flavor ?/5:
Templating ?/2:
Score: ?/20
Balance 6/8: This spell can be used in two ways: (1) The caster of Mirror Match is the defending player. Or, (2) the caster the offensive player.
First, as the defensive player: Creature hordes take full advantage of the spell's effect. If two creatures are assigned to block one attacking creature, attacking creature is surely destroyed, in the absence of regeneration (or the like) of course. More creatures, better results.
Second, as the offensive player. Of course, creatures will be tailor-fitted for this spell's effect to be maximized. Creatures with regeneration that require an activation cost that is color depended such as "2G: Regenerate ~.' This ensures your creatures stay alive while a good chance the other doesn't.
One question arises however: What if the attacking creature has an ability "~ cannot block" or has protection from its own color? What happens then?
Creativity 5/5: Very creative. I love it.
Flavor 5/5: very flavorful and blue/white is a perfect fit. Couldn't think of a better name. Not a fan of the flavored text however, but i'll let it slide.
Templating: 1/2: I think it should say "Blocking creatures become a copy of..."
Score: 17/20
Balance 4/8: Pretty complicated card for an effect that is used once: "When Ith's Labyrinth comes into play, untap target creature." I dont really know what your intial intentions are for the card, but i think you've over-thought it and ended up making complicated than it should be.
Creativity 2/5: A maze made by Ith where the creature gets lost in and ends up not being able to deal damage. I'm pretty sure we've seen this before.
Flavor 3/5: Love the name. Love using Ith as reference to another great card. I don't knw why you made it a one time effect, though. Made it look like the labyrinth was easy to get out to.
Templating 0/2: It was mentioned twice in the card that it could only be played during combat, that's not very elegant.
Score: 9/20
Balance 4/8: Let me see, if there are a total of even number of creatures then two players get equal amount. Since its alternate starting with active player, the active gets the slight edge. Take note of the word slight. If there are a total of odd number of creatures then the active player has a better advantage having one extra creature than the other. Its all boils down the the types of creatures in play whether this spell is a bust move or a great move when played. The wording brecomes totally obscure when there are three or more players.
Creativity: 3/5: The execution could have been done better. Instead of patterning it too much to Struggle of Sanity.
Flavor 3/5: This is just complicated version of Brawl.
Templating: 1/2 not as elegant as it should be.
Score: 14/20
Here's my proposed challenge.
MAke a card with an ability that can be played only during combat or a spell that can be played only during combat (for instants or sorceries). For examples //gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?name=+[during">+[combat]||type=+[during]+[combat]+[Instant]||subtype=+[during]+[combat]||text=+[during]+[combat]"]click here. Again, any card type except planeswalkers is allowed (creature, enchantment, artifact, instants, or sorceries)
Balance 8/8: Fair gameplay is still priority: mana cost, game effect, the use of drawbacks, etc.
Creativity 5/5: Show your design skills here people, concept originality, use of existing designs, combinations, etc. And remember quantity doesn't always translate to quality
Flavor 5/5: Card name, creature type if creature, color pie issues. Plus points for a nice flavored text thrown in
Templating 2/2: No one wants a confusing card, elegance is still key.
I'll close the challenge and post the judgings if there are at least ten posters. Good luck.
Creature - Viashino Warrior
Provoke, wither
Whenever Roughshod Trasher becomes blocked, regenerate it.
The roughshods take pride of hunting in the open. They prefer that their intended prey be fully aware of the incoming onslaught and the unavoidable, inevitable kill that follows.
1/1
Artifact - Equipment
Equip :2mana::symr:
Equipped creature has provoke and gains +1/+1.
Unattach Demolisher Axe: Destroy target artifact.
Next:
Mallet of Malice