#general commentary

@0woah — Contracted Excavator

Interesting name and concept you’re working with here. I would definitely caution to make this rare, because, I mean, Ragavan’s a strong little monkey as is (and, like, this isn't even comparable, just so we're clear), and even at this cost the ability to run a mono-red deck with all Mountains and this is incredibly strong. Still, I gotta say: this is a real solid submission. I’m viewing it through a rare lens all the same. The ability to exile-steal your opponents’ best cards or at least prevent them from getting their shenanigans is pretty crazy.

I think I see the flavor, too, but this is one of those utilitarian cards; I’m doing commentary out of order so I think I said something similar below. Regardless! On the flavor front, sure, dwarf mercenaries checks out. Good use of the type with the mechanical synergy. The dwarf mines, and whatever they find is yours. Awesome. In limited, this could be a really strong utility card if not a half-decent attacker, and once you up the rarity we’re pretty good. Notes: It should be “Mountain card” for the activation, and I would word it: “Choose target opponent. Exile the top card of that player’s library and the top card of your library. You may cast those cards this turn, and you may spend mana as though it were mana of any color to cast those spells.” You don’t need “in hand” for this.

~

@batatafilosofal — Flood Away (JUDGE PICK)

In a mono-blue deck, this thing’s a heck of a slog to get through. I’m a huge fan of big swingy bounce-like cards, but wow... All the same, though, this has a unique way of getting around that by having the big things come in first. It’s a shame that your opponents’ permanents will enter the battlefield before yours—unless they’re all small and your stuff is pretty big. Which, well, speaks for itself. What a strange card. I think I want to veer away from flavor-specific critique here because it’s clearly a general-magic utilitarian card, and that’s totally fine. The art could speak for all of that.

The question is then, with the math and whatnot, if this is a little too headachey for standard, or even for limited, and I love this card but I gotta say, a zillion counters and upkeep triggers and a return to suspend in standard? Not sure how I feel about that optimistically. What I will say, however, is that this card’s definitely great in digital. On Arena, you cast this card, and beep boop everything’s out of the picture. I have a vehement disdain for Arena, but I have a soft spot for places where human error would make things worse. Perhaps this card has a home. Also, you can remove that second “each” from the first ability, I believe.

~

@bread-into-toast— Peak Performance

I’m curious why this wasn’t an “until end of turn” or “until the end of your next turn” here; Occam’s razor, that was an oversight, but regardless. Quite a strange little thing here. I think the wording that you were going for and the ultimate execution may have, well, needed more words, like those weird milling-recursion cards they’ve been making lately. I think I see what you were going for generally: double-impulse type of common, with an extra land grab. Fine enough! Not egg-in-an-avocado good, but fine enough.

I’ll admit that the flavor text is making me grin. This isn’t a flavor-based contest, so people are probably going for a little more of a natural what-follows kind of vibe, which is totally cool! Silly for the advantage. You know, it’s a shame that this card only gets Mountains. It’s basically unplayable or at least really frustrating in a two-color draft archetype. Perhaps this is suggesting more of a constructed lean or a monocolor format, Pauper-burny, and I feel that. The limited player in me is seeing this as a fifteenth pick almost all of the time. I ain’t about to complain when I get advantage’d out by the 16-mountain burner, y’know?

~

@deg99 — Llanowar Purist

Is there precedent for two replacement effects like this? I mean, I grok it, but wow. This card can be absolutely bonkers. In a casual mono-green Elf deck, having each basic Forest put a COUNTER on each Elf you control?? Good lord. I wonder if this card would be better served as a core-set or DMU-type staple, because in a type-matters environment where Elves are one of the draftable archetypes, this is pretty strong. Hm, all the same, you have to build around it kinda hard. But in constructed? I dunno, I feel that you can make a strong Elf deck even stronger to the point of it being almost out of control. But maybe not. I think I’m worrying too much about blowouts from my days of Felidar Retreat. And this is kind of a more limited Felidar Retreat.

I’m overthinking it. Powerful? Yes. A staple? Eh. Good in limited? If you can make it work, I suppose. Elves and the rest of ‘em make for hard archetypes but the environment can change that. By itself, this card’s speaking to a more constructed means, I think, but could work for limited. Nothing wrong with cards like that overall. It’s not immediately evident but it’s not asking to be so. Getting even one other Elf out would make things work pretty well, so I’m going to say that, just like DMU, this would be totally fine. Oh, right, and as a grammar check: A basic foRest is a land. A basic foRRest....you know what, there was a joke here, but I'm electing to omit it. Point is, one R.

~

@halfsilveredmirror — Vantress Waterwheels (JUDGE PICK)

Good news! There’s only one card I could immediately see with which this goes two-card infinite. You, my friend, are tempting fate. What on earth! This is a beast of a card to get down for making blockers and tappers and mana dorks even better. What else?... You know what, it doesn’t have to do anything else. Clock of Omens was broken, and this card is less so, which is genuinely awesome. It’s asking for infinite combos, of course, but that’s the way the cookie crumbles, and there’s no specific archetype around which to build, AND it takes up mana resources, so that’s great.

Maybe this card’s even bad! Hold on. I mean, like, if you’re in limited, and you try to make this card work, and it’s the one you draw when you’re dead on board, it’s gonna feel REALLY bad to draw it. Like, astoundingly bad feeling. I love that. It’s a card that asks a lot of the player to make it work. Simple, powerful, great for looting dorks. I will say that the flavor text is pretty weak here. Waterwheels making kinetic energy isn’t exactly surprising, so the “reveal” you’re going for doesn’t land for me. I dunno, just not feeling the payoff.

~

@izzet-always-r-versus-u — Scuttle

You know, I’m not sure why this one didn’t wow me. I think the simplicity is fine, and the card plays harder the more Islands you have, which is fine, even though it’s almost always going to be a strictly better Mana Leak in the late game—but, it is an uncommon after all. Limited is gonna be fine with it, as it can vary depending on the environment and there’s nothing wrong with Force Spikes. Maybe that’s it: the most I can say for it is that “there’s nothing wrong with it.” And we do need cards like that, cards that could even be great in scenarios where now we have Mana Leak-but-better in Pioneer and whatnot.

The flavor is a little off. Sirens dashing hopes and dashing ships is a violent act of enforced luring, and perhaps this is the place where the ships (spells) are destroyed, but the flavor text’s description feels...like there should be another party? I don’t know, I think that it’s probably fine—with a different name. Scuttling is the act of making holes to sink the ship, cutting away, sometimes deliberately to your own vessel. It’s a subtle/non-telegraphed act of espionage by two equal parties, which doesn’t come across here for me. Now, I was thinking about crabs, and the flavor text of a possible reprint where crabs eat their way through the bottom of a boat, making a hole to sink it—and that’s the slightly less violent version than the “dashing” here. Verb choice matters.

~

@just--a--penguin — Garden of the Eidolon

How exactly does the dragon come into play here? Perhaps in the art direction, but who knows. Greek mythology is full of possibilities. First things first: I like the flavor format. Also, how does a land get inspired? Could’ve used a little more substance. I assume the eidolons are the ones tending the gardens. Do the gods need to eat? At least on Theros, I thought they were supplemented by the belief of their people. No matter. Tirezius still has fruit, so maybe I’m talking nonsense. At the end of the day, this card is fine, but I wouldn’t pick it highly in any format. Also, how does a land get inspired?

I guess third things third, this card should be uncommon? It’s a pretty great ramp spell and fixer, but that’s been done at common before. The mana not emptying feels like it’s upping the complexity; maybe this could be a three-mana uncommon? Either way, it’s not a bad card, but it’s lacking a little bit for me. Going back to it, I think the flavor text could’ve used a little more oomph.

EDIT: Something strange happened to the copy-pasting of the commentary here, so I have no idea what else to say beyond this. I think in the end I went with a rant about rarity, mana emptying, questioning myself and how mana works, and then I asked Maro something, and then I made popcorn and drove to catsit. Bottom line as well was that this card is nigh unplayable even in limited at this cost and rarity. Needs other substance and focus.

~

@misterstingyjack — Stonybrook Tideweaver (JUDGE PICK)

Oh, well that’s weird—but I guess either great minds think alike or great workshops produce cool results. The merfolk Island-love has always been there but I haven’t thought about it much until now! I really like the mechanics of this card. It’s asking a little bit of the board, but it’s an effect that, given the state of the board, I can imagine people trying to make work, and having it work well. Tap a merfolk, then get your High Tide. Wording-wise, I believe “until end of turn” needs to go before all that because most MTG cards like to end on a clean .” at the end of their rules text when applicable.

I don’t think playability would be affected in either limited or constructed. This is a card for Merfolk players to have fun with and to boost their archetypical decks. I like the specificity of it. The flavor text feels good conceptually but reads oddly to me. The second part being its own sentence makes me... Oh, no, nono, dangit, now I REALLY want this to be a rhyming couplet somehow. Look, I’m not going to figure that out, but I’m tasking you with it now. This is your burden to bear. The tl;dr of it is that having that sentence makes it feel stilted after a period and, like the river, it could use smoother flow.

~

@nine-effing-hells — Ire of Stones

You might want to double-check and hand-enter your reminder text, because “another Mountain” is cute flavorfully but doesn’t need the ‘nother’ up in there. Still, I feel this card and I feel what you’re going for. This one is weird and I really like that drawback for it. For this contest, I feel that this is exactly the kind of card that I was hoping to see at the concept level: it interacts with the card type in a manner that shows a flavorful caress. Did I ask for that specifically? No, but what’re we gonna do at this point, right?

The title “ire” is a little off, but as for the rest of it... What can I say? This card’s cute. It could be fun to get your Goblin Guides in early and then, when they die, you get some untapped lands. I doubt you can go infinite easily with these things, so that’s all fun and fair. Instead, you have a beater, and that’s all we can ask for. Hm, I wonder how this contest would have gone with monocolor cards that care about different land types... In retrospect, that might have even been better, but you know what, I’ll give it another year, assuming I have the time and energy for this, heh. It’s a beater, it’s sensible, it’s fast, it’s not too powerful, I like it. Fair’s fair.

~

@real-aspen-hours — Slip Under

So yeah, let’s assume a rare here, heh. Mechanically, I think that there’s nothing wrong with either part of this card. The wording on the first ability could be “Creatures you control have ward (2)” for ease of access, so let’s assume that. This card is a limited stranger, an odd duck, because it kind of forces these two colors, but if that’s what works, that’s what works. I would have liked more of a flavorful connection between them, because it’s fine as it stands and I appreciate the multicolor bend, but I want that little glue there.

The real glue that’s missing is what the name represents in terms of an aura. Intangible concepts aren’t easy, and perhaps with cards like Find the Path and Annex I have less ground to stand on, but verbs as aura names rub me the wrong way—or at least I feel that it doesn’t fit as well. Maybe the creatures are slipping under? But then, why would one slipping-under action result in the ward, and then another be phasing out? I would rather have a specific flavor name that referred to the protection granted by the act of enchanting this land that made the sacrifice effect more sensible. Oh, yeah, before I forget: card’s still pretty great! Fun to abuse all your little creatures for a boardwipe.

~

@reaperfromtheabyss — Seeker of the Thousand Ways

Gah, long names that look awkward, my old nemesis! ... Gah, cool mechanics involved in combat, my other nemesis! Ahem. Anyway, this card’s hella cool. I think that it speaks for itself, and I think that “You may play that card this turn” would be a better way to word it and has appeared before, but that’s a small quibble. Should the exile be a may ability? Eh, no, maybe not. I also really like the idea of scrying both cards to the bottom and then flipping an even more unplayable card off of the top. That would happen to me for sure.

It’s also quite an archetype you’re asking for. Three-color possibilities actually feels...kinda cool? It makes me wonder if they’d reprint the DMU duals—and how many times have I mentioned those now? I don’t even want to count—for those kinds of specific shenanigans. Maybe just a couple, maybe just enemy pairs. Either way, no, yeah, it’s a totally fine card. The name really does leave a bit to be desired, though. Seeker of the Way was certainly a card, and this callback feels almost...funny, or at least an attempt at a joke rather than an uplifting remembrance to me. Still, could just be me.

~

@spooky-bard — Tarpit Ceratops

Like a fossilized dinosaur skeleton, this card feels cool but a little too sticky. The explore archetype in limited was a strange one to say the least, and in constructed—well, wasn’t there some crazy-ass lifegain deck going around? Am I the only one who remembers that? I might be going crazy. Anyway, this card groks, but the pieces that want to go together don’t quite have that backing for me yet. Referencing cards revealed through another card’s exploration means that this card is kinda dead a lot of the time, no pun intended, and a four-mana 3/3 menace is super cool but not awesome. The archetype could work well by putting THIS into the graveyard, and that’s all cool.

I dunno, I’m just not sold yet. I do grok it, I promise, and I know that it should adhere. There’s nothing specific that I can point to that makes me hesitate. If anything, I’d say that it’s the ambition of it. There is indeed a fair amount of ambition taking place with the question of what gets revealed, and you know what, I want to commend you for trying something new on that front. Small actual note, the “it” on the Swamp clause there? It reads like it’s referring to the Swamp and that’s pretty confusing. And shouldn’t it be “is” revealed?

~

@stupidstupidratcreatures — Kor Ambusher

This is certainly a Kor. You know what, I’m actually a little surprised that there wasn’t a card named this already, and I could have sworn that there was. Ah well, learn something new every day. So! Mechanically, yep, that’s a warrior, it’s suggesting an RW warriors archetype, it’s a cool white card, and it gets to break a little chunk of a the pie without actually breaking anything. That much is all fine.

For contest terms, this card’s pretty insubstantial? The lack of art direction and flavor text mean that the ‘generally good’ mechanics are all we have from it. This card feels like something in the slot of a set skeleton. And you know what, if you’re building a set, there’s nothing wrong with that, and it’s understandable why this card would exist. It just means that there’s not much to say about it beyond the fact that it’s...good. Perhaps the nature of the contest meant that that was more of the mechanical bend, but all the same. Afraid I don’t have much more to say, cap’n.

~

@wolkemesser — The Soilsmith

The reasons why Yedora specifies “nontoken” are numerous, but in general, the face-down restriction is the more important one. The Soilsmith retaining name, mana value, and abilities means that going infinite and abusing sac outlets to basically get unkillable lands with static abilities is...rough. It’s rough! I think it’s inadvertent, but you made a magnificently busted card here. In Limited, this is the card you have to build around and win the game with, and in constructed—I’m thinking Commander—you aren’t going to make any friends here. Besides, it counts ITSELF. Which is disgustingly strong.

I know that Obsidian Fireheart is cool, but that reminder text wouldn’t be as useful as just saying that it remains after The Soilsmith isn’t on the battlefield or whatever. “Rotting” implies decay, and this is permanent. There are...quite a few quibbles with this card, and I do still want to say that it’s a cool idea, but wow, no, it’s mechanically broken. Win some, lose some.

~

One of these cards, IMO, fits next week’s prompt perfectly. Which one?

@bergdg​ — Crushed by the Depths

A strong start and a finish that had the potential to be strong but didn’t quite get there. The multicolor darkness of the sea, great choice, very classical. The bounce that specifically implies vehicles, love it. And I think it’s the landing on the flavor text that came to a dribble. Honestly, this card’s 80% amazing. Milling is great and bounce is great, plus the discard? Super cool. I feel that this could have been an instant even. “Nonland permanent” would’ve been too powerful for instant speed, so you made the right call there in the first place even as a sorcery. I dunno, the sense of this thing is still fantastic!

“...faster than water” is where I feel your simile could have been stronger. “Flows” as a verb choice is unfortunately predictable, even though the image is evocative enough. It’s difficult to explain writing choices specifically, but I will give you props for placing the sailors at the center with the octopus at the front, as well as having the “Depths” be the action here, as though the octopus is the incarnation of the ocean rather than merely some monster living there. Again, lots of good subtle decisions, but flavor text word choice could’ve been stronger.

EDIT: So I wrote all of this before I looked up the actual card, and I’m realizing that you were riffing off the original flavor text. I’m writing this before I go over the main reflection, but I need to state here: part of the point of this contest was to break away from the original art, context, and to use the art in your own unique way, to make the OPPOSITE of a callback.

~

@deg99​ — Cavalry Charge

As I began to write, I looked up the original card, and I need to state again that the purpose of this contest was to make something new out of the art, as the post and examples were supposed to have demonstrated. With the name being a callback, the mana cost being the same, and the flavor being a riff off of the original, this is, bluntly, not what I was looking for.

I actually didn’t bother to look up some of the cards from which these were based, either because I knew them and their context already, or because I assumed people would deviate as expected. Still, looking at this card on its own merits, it’s perfectly fine. It’s quite powerful, honestly, and perhaps the +4 is even a little too good? If you go unpunished with a 1/1, this is an entire quarter if someone’s life with extra evasion if necessary on turn two. +3 is perhaps safer. I admittedly do like the haste.

On the original card, though: the cavalry in question gives haste to demonstrate the action without the consequences. This card is an action with the consequences still in limbo, but the flavor text implies that there are consequences suffered? The keyword haste implies momentum and celerity that is disconnected from consequences; as a result, the talk of consequences doesn’t gel as well as the original. The first paragraph still stands, though, as the most important thing to keep in mind.

~

@demimonde-semigoddess​ — Indolent Loathing (JUDGE PICK)

Well this is a weird little thing. I honestly had to look up three or four different cards, but this is worded perfectly even if it feels strange. I do think, however, that it needs to be rare. It’s a choice, yeah, but it’s not an easy choice, and I don’t want more than one or two of these in any given draft going around the table. You broke away from the norm and it’s very strange? I wonder what people would do with this card. Still, it feels...neat! It feels like there are some places where it would be useless, but that’s all cards, really.

“Indolent” certainly is a choice of words. I had to re-check the definition—gah, you’re making me do WORK here, what a travesty—but I guess it checks out? It feels kind of cruel, and perhaps “cruelty” over “loathing” would be my personal choice; loathing feels more personal, and you’re not even targeting. Or, is this saying that the act of loathing for the world is so strong that this Medusa character simply exerts it into the world, and it’s soaked up by the unfortunate? Hm, lots of thoughts here. This is a card that’s honestly more perplexing than it is exciting, but it’s far more intriguing than it is confusing. Yay, adjectives!

I wanted to make this card a Judge Pick to show the weirdness of how cards can push limits while retaining the ability to be grokked.

~

@dimestoretajic​ — Fiery Fascinator

There was a lot of talk in the chat about this, wasn’t there! A bear that wrangles feels like something, unfortunately, that would have been an uncommon all-star back in the day, and now would be a common chaff baby. But wow, there are odd consequences here, and I wonder how much tech this can be when considering some of the things people are doing with creatures. A burn deck can steal an incarnation or Batterskull germ in Modern, it can nab anything in Pauper but bogles, it’s a draft bomb practically... Actually, this would be a problem in draft. Considering that it’s a body of its own that you can save up for to grab two of your opponent’s best creatures late in the game, and that you can easily draft 2-3 of them... God, in Sealed? What a nightmare.

I want to like this card a lot more than I know I should. Three would’ve been the cutoff. I’m considering my experiences over the years, and yeah, this guy’s just too much. Still, what I do like is how you completely changed the context while keeping so much of the original card. He’s drawing a crowd, but he’s more jerkish than malicious, and that Rakdos grin is smug more than demonic. It does indeed feel different because it’s an EOT effect rather than an aura, and that’s pretty great. The name is...a little eh, but that’s a personal preference thing. The FT made me smirk and I literally just noticed the Performer type. Smirk X2 combo.

~

@fractured-infinity​ — Wings of Nyx

This is a fascinating card. I liked how you found the perfect precedent in Majestic Metamorphosis (or another card, but that’s where I found it) and you made a new flier that feels different in the moment, a new story. Interesting! I...think that escaping from the underworld feels a little odd to me, and there’s a question of how common escape is and a whole lot of other inconclusive things—that’s all nonsense. The point IS. This card’s alright!

I don’t love it but there’s no reason not to love it. I think, from a limited standpoint, it’s both an explosive finisher—double strike, my pride and joy—and it can turn an annoying enchantment into a creature for easier removal, possibly. It’s versatile, sensible, and perhaps there’s some tautology between the name of the card and the flavor text but mechanically, there’s nothing wrong with it. Turn-four swinging and drawing is quite aggressive sometimes, but this can also make surprise blockers. Is this a combat trick? Making it an instant was... You know what ,I think I’m liking this card a lot more now that I write about it.

~

@greensunzenith​ — Draconic Pulse

Bold move, turning the cat into a dragon. It really does look similar! I think that there’s a lot unspoken in your use of the word “pulse” there. It implies that momentary beat in the world that’s also some kind of constancy in the background, that it could happen at any time. Very interesting. Looking through, wow, you guys are impressing me with precedent. Defiling Tears, of all cards! Not gonna lie, people got somewhat weird with this contest, but I don’t hate it. This card feels very much like a limited common that’s mostly going to be used for an Aerial Formation or Jump effect.

There’s nothing wrong with that, but it’s not jumping out to me. I suppose this is the issue with thee contests, right? I love this card and it’s doing exactly what it needs to do and it’s just not scratching an itch. Compared to uncommon/rare cards, it’s hard for commons to stand out too much. I guess the only possible critique I could have is that there’s no flavor text? This hardly needed it, even, not when its role is almost purely mechanical. Maybe there’s something best left unsaid about the draconic underpinnings, the way that creatures in this world just exist within ephemeral states... Yeah. This made me think a lot.

~

@helloijustreadyourpost​ — Geistlamp Incinerator

I think this one’s definitely a far fling from its original context, that’s for sure. Honestly I don’t know what the ‘gambit’ even was in the original card. Keeping it Innistradian is a little hit or miss, but you know, Izzet would be the only contender, and that’s just about the same context as the original. Still, I can’t help but feel a little odd about the fact that it’s... Wait, no, is the lamp MADE from geists and geist-energy? The name almost suggests that he wants to kill geists with the lamp, ish, but the flavor text talks about beasts (werewolves?) who won’t stay dead (zombies??). I feel that you’re mixing your metaphors a little here.

Mechanically, heck yeah, this card’s pretty good. I personally would have given it a static ability that killed things on exile like Incendiary Oracle. Hm. Actually, did you see Incendiary Oracle before making this card? The difference of four power with one mana to four with four isn’t insignificant, though, that’s fair. Maybe you did! This is an interesting one to consider with that power level. Dying is another issue. Still, yeah, I’d make the exile clause static. You did a good job on the stats, I think.

~

@hiygamer​ — Precognitive Patrol

“Impending murder” is funny, I’ll admit. As a rare...I don’t know about this card? It’s not bad but I don’t feel you’re getting the most bang for your buck with it as it stands. I’d rather have taken the flavor text out for a tax, even. Is that a bit much? Possibly, but there are plenty of sweepers and ETB abilities and sacrifices to worry about that are much more annoying. With the big toughness above power, this card doesn’t have that aggressive edge that something like True-Name Nemesis evokes. Not that TNN is precedent, God no, but it invites a form of comparison that makes this particular card feel underpowered.

Additionally, while the name is a stellar choice, I don’t know if this particular art was the one to pick for this contest, because it’s so specific that there’s not much you can do to change the mood of it. You have a smug wizard explaining the law in both instances, although the situational context is implied to be different. But it’s the same place, Guild, manner of dissipation, etc. I don’t think that’s what I was looking for exactly. How much more ‘out there’ could you have gone? With this contest, there was a lot—and this art, while good, was limiting.

~

@horsecrash​ — Valakut Aspirant (JUDGE PICK)

I laughed at the flavor text. Then the card made me scratch my chin a little, and there really isn’t a whole load of precedent here. Akoum Hellkite is certainly a card, and then you have this goblin who’s doing some awesome things, so that’s...nice? I think this is a card where you’re gonna hope it doesn’t die and then go nuts with it. Bolting for Mountains works in Amulet-Titan, but would it work here? Dryad/Scapeshift is already pretty nuts. But forgetting that, limited—it’s fine. Really good, actually. You’re not going to get the Bolt too often and if you do it’s because your opponent can’t do anything about a 1/1 somehow. Which happens. But not too often. God, is this card balanced?

Probably not but what am I if not a pusher of limitations. Actually, I bemoan power level a lot, but I don’t bemoan goblins, so that’s fun. Kurgar, though, that’s my guy, he’s cool. I think the non-sequitur of wanting to become a volcano in the context of the name is actually hilarious, and the follow-up question of “how?” is met by a hot rock to the face. What if this guy was a wizard instead of a warrior, actually? I mean, the art says warrior, but the implication feels more mystical to me. I’d also change “Kurgar wants” to “Kurgar wanted” in the flavor text since this card is a little more tongue-in-cheek storytelling focused. He got what he wanted: to rock out.

I wanted to make this card a Judge Pick for touching on a specific type of humor that doesn’t try to jump through hoops to make an emotional connection.

~

@i-am-the-one-who-wololoes​ — Volcano Watcher

Well, going back-to-back with volcanos then! Touching on the mechanics, this card is actually very odd to me just because the hoops you have to go through and the timing doesn’t feel super streamlined even though it’s grokable enough to be useful. Basic mountain was the right call here. I think that’s the best way you could have worded it, and I suppose that it’s a good implication of building around in limited! You want wizards and this card suggests an interest in how you play your lands, how you manage your spells, and what you want to loot. The forceful discard can be really annoying, though. Imagine: You have an awesome 5-drop in hand as your only card, you have four lands, and you have this guy. You draw a basic Mountain. Now, you can’t play your awesome 5-drop because, to do so, you need to play your Mountain, and when you play your Mountain, you have to discard the card you want to play. See what I mean?

There’s not much to say about the flavor besides the usual comments about exposition. When every part of the name and flavor explains what we already know, there’s no mystery. That’s what I want you to make more of: mystery. The next time you make flavor text for a card, sincerely think about what the reader might already guess, what they might know, and what you can say that makes them consider that they don’t know anything after all.

~

@misterstingyjack​ — Linked Instinct

Tough break on Collective Unconscious already being a card. Ah well! This card’s certainly something. I think I was actually down on the name to begin with because, well, isn’t the instinct of a creature type a good thing? Why would they all tap? But then, I realized, if you put the fear or confusion in one, it frightens and confuses the others—a twisteroo on the old, well, collective unconscious of a species. Checks out! Very very interesting use of the physical to represent the mystical there. That’s exactly the kind of recontextualization that I was hoping for in this contest.

I guess the implications of tribal mean that this card is a combat trick answer of sorts. The fact that it’s one-sided is probably a good thing. With this kind of effect, I honestly don’t have much to say, because it does exactly what it says on the tin. Perhaps there’s something else to connect it with tribes that like to tap pre-combat before swinging in and doing things, or untapping your creatures to activate tap abilities on someone’s end step, but regardless, this is a perfectly reasonable tribal card. Or anti-tribal. We’ll figure it out.

~

@ozthearistocrat​ — Pharika’s Afflictor

Minor minor minor note before I talk about all the good things: the lose 1 life would come before the card draw. ANYWAY. Mechanically, this card’s a slam-dunk. The difference between this and the still-awesome Ophiomancer is that you’re sacrificing mana every turn to get that extra snake which will eventually cost you life if you’re not careful to the point of Not Alive. But you can get a billion of ‘em! But, but, but. Lots of power and lots of payoffs. The fact that it’s a tap and not automatic is a great drawback. I think this is one of the most powerful and yet balanced cards from this round, no question. It’s definitely a bomb and it uses great contemporary design skills.

Perhaps it would have been best for this contest to, again, steer away from the intention of the art in the same world. I would have loved to see a snake-guy on the back streets of Ravnica, perhaps, or sneaking around the walls of [city from Ikoria?] or something. There wasn’t much transition between the art as intended and the card as presented, which, again, is what I really wanted to see more of. Still, perhaps this is another save-for-the-imaginary-cube card. I suppose that, on Theros, this art would have been better revered, so that’s nice.

~

@railway-covidae — Mechanized Rebirth (JUDGE PICK)

So this card is a fantastic example of a card where, if I didn’t know this was Draco, I would have imagined that you found this off the internet as an example from someone’s fantasy portfolio. Is it a specific legend? No, it’s the depiction of a rebirth, as emphasized by the clawing from the lava with newly-minted metal parts! I’m exaggerating just slightly, but really, it’s that cool. This is what I wanted to see a lot more of. Good job.

Card’s alright too! I still would have liked to see a line of flavor there with something pithy or menacing about this totally-not-Draco creature, for one, and for two, this card honestly could have been 2BB. Most reanimation that gets back the massive creatures does so because they’re massive, so limited the power and toughness is a drawback most of the time. Perhaps 3BB since it can get any graveyard, but still. I also like how you used the limitation of that P/T to show how the metal locks the body into place. Overall, yeah, this is really good!

I wanted to make this card a Judge Pick to show what kind of emphasis you can use to truly change the context of a piece of art.

~

@realaspenhours — Mournful Geist (JUDGE PICK)

Sorry to put the behind-the-scenes out there, but just so you know, the flavor text post-grammar change is still a run-on sentence. The comma could have perhaps been replaced with an emdash and the period with a question mark, and at this point it’s so minor that I’m actually joking a tiny bit. It matters, but don’t take it too seriously. I will say that the LTB trigger should have come before Unearth, I’m 90% sure. Anyway, though. Unearth to represent spirits, that’s an interesting one flavorfully. This card’s curious to say the least. Whether or not that more or less accurately represents death’s walky-abouty on Innistrad, well, I have my opinions. Wait, you’re literally here to read my opinions. Cool! My opinion is that disturb gets the job done with a little more flavor accuracy but I understand Unearth as well and think there are cool things to be done with it.

“If it didn’t die,” though! That’s so cool! I read that and I felt something click on in my brain, you know? Like, that’s just a fascinating piece of text. Exile, bounce, flickering, shuffling in, all triggering that? I think that’s really interesting and a great piece of text. You really nailed something that hasn’t been thought of before and I want to commend that.

I wanted to make this card a Judge Pick for opening my eyes to new curious limitations I hadn’t seen before.

~

@reaperfromtheabyss​ — Traverse Terra Nova

I immediately thought of Scapeshift, which I’m realizing is a terrible precedent, but wow, can you imagine. Look, I’ve been playing a lot of TitanShift on digital goldfishing, alright? This card’s still really good, oddly unique, and honestly, it might be comparable to Growth Spiral of all things. It’s hard to make the draw work in limited unless there’s a huge as-fan of nonbasics, but forgoing that, there’s also this idea that you get to beef everything by +2/+2 for two mana if you have the land-drops, and if you have the land drops, you haven’t spent as much on creatures, and that’s pretty crazy to think about, actually. This card goes through a LOT of thought to make work in the ways you need for maximization. Quite cool.

The name really isn’t doing it for me. I can try to ignore the gray skin of the Conquistadors there and pretend it’s a trick of the light, but that name really is the weakest part of the card. I don’t know, that’s a small thing to consider, but with a contest about contextualizing art, the focus there is a bigger sticking point than it would be elsewhere. Maybe this is one of those things where it’s a me-issue and people like it, but it reads clunkily to me. I do like your use of the green complement with the package, though. I feel where you were going.

~

@spooky-bard​ — Roll Out the Red Carpet

The use of a newspaper as flavor text is actually so cool. There’s absolutely no precedent for it but it feels so natural in the world of New Capenna and I think that Capenna’s strength in its references was super cool. You bring that out quite well there, although, heh, the lede isn’t quite editorial standards. I think as a piece of context in the world, you really hit the nail on the head there.

Card’s good! Tutors are definitely good, and tokens are good too. Limiting it to Naya/Cabaretti colors is a feelbad for commander players, but they can go sac treasures. Ain’t no issue when you have a limited focus in mind, so thank you for that. While the context is close, I appreciate how you made the rhino from a bodyguard into a celebrity. Look at that suit, that expression! I think the celebratory context is just about all you could have done, and that’s okay. Maybe earlier I was too harsh with how much deviation I wanted, but there’s only so many times you guys can read the word “context” before you start booing, and I don’t blame you.

~

@squeezyboi — Janoc, Tin Street Tinker

Good things: this card’s weird. Not as good things: this was supposed to be for a standard-legal draftable set, and this card feels way too wonky for that. Am I paranoid, or is the likelihood of seeing a Ravnica set without guild mechanics or with splashy guild mechanics a bit... Actually, wait, investigation is deciduous, isn’t it. Ugh. I feel that there’s going to be a lot of mixing and matching in Magic’s future, but maybe it won’t be so bad. Maybe. I do want more cohesion from time to time but I’ll accept that this card’s going to be weird.

For the activated ability, I would phrased it: “Until end of turn, Clues you control gain “T, Sacrifice...”” etc., with ‘add’ being capitalized. The ability to get clues off of spells is very cool and this would definitely be a fun commander. I think that, for this contest, this may have been a little too fun. Either my vibes for what constitutes a standard/premier card are off, or this feels a touch wacky for me. Hardly an issue when it’s gained an amount of popularity, right? Ah, who am I kidding, peer pressure means nothing. This card’s cool but not my particular brand of cool, and I’m not going to discount the coolness that it’s made upon other folks. I will say that the FT isn’t particularly gripping, but it’s serviceable, and the card does a good enough job at explaining what you’re doing.

~

@stareyedesper​ — Pursuer of Divinity

I guess it’s kind of old hat, but it fits. I think the mechanical addition of counters is the best use of your mechanics here and it’s got precedent in the Evolved Sleeper. Clerics could have fun with it, and if someone makes it happen in draft, well, all the more power to them. Maybe I’m a little wibbly because I’ve seen this kind of thing happen before, but does it work? Yeah, absolutely. Ten mana over however many turns to make an 8/8 flying, vigilance, indestructible... HEY, WAIT A MINUTE.

Ha. Quite clever, actually. I genuinely did not see that coming. Also, I do particularly enjoy how you used the art here. I’m getting this kind of midrange-mysticism Ojutai-ish vibes from this card that feel natural and cool, not gonna lie. Again, this is the exact kind of art-twisting that I wanted to see, per the examples. The figure at the center becomes the focus, and they pursue divinity. What else is there? I think the angelic callback (intentional or not, who knows) helps out a lot and you did a good job with this one.

~

@wolkemesser​ — Naive Rich

The flavor text is good. That’s about all I got because this card has a lot of mechanical tweaks we need to get through and one major sin. In short, the most important thing I wanted from this contest was to have mechanical distinctions between your card and the card from which you took the art, and Prosperity’s X=draw is practically built into this card. That’s basically the opposite of what I was asking for.

X and Y don’t have to exist here. The abilities should’ve been: “~ enters the battlefield with X wealth counters on it. // When ~ enters the battlefield, for each wealth counter on it, you lose 1 life and draw a card. // When ~ leaves the battlefield, discard a card for each wealth counter on it You gain that much life.” Maybe there’s a “that much life” somewhere in there but precedent is hard to find. The point is, though, that there’s no precedent for X an Y being what they are. Reading down this rabbit hole, did you intend for Give // Take to be precedent? I don’t think that’s the hole to go down. Someone smarter than me, I may need help.

~