This design is still wrong, but I wanted to share some of my ideas in the hope people could improve on them.

My idea was to look for quests at common.

I decided to try reversing the zendikar quests by giving all the colours the same reward but different triggers. I wanted something which was splashy and worth having, but not so strong it would define every game (because that warps common). I decided to try "N +1/+1 counters". It was originally "a +1/+1 counter on each creature you control" but that sucked if you'd lost all your creatures by attacking.

I also considered card draw as something every colour could get, but that didn't seem quite right.

I'm not sold on this condition, but the idea was each colour would have a different common quest that any deck could achieve, but a dedicated deck could do faster.

There are a bunch of details on this card which need to be fixed, but are hopefully separate from the basic concept including:

• The number of creatures/activations for the trigger
• The templating of the success ability (triggered or activated? can it be shorter? should the card use +1/+1 counters rather than quest counters)
• The number of +1/+1 counters as a reward, should it be fixed, or fixed to all on one creature or all on different creatures?
• Is it too much card-disadvantage to play this and not be able to immediately activate it?

It'd be a lot more natural for the same number of counters on it to be the number you distribute.

+1/+1 counters as a common quest reward is pretty fitting; every colour gets them sometimes (green would get them all put onto a single creature, probably)

Is it too much to not be able to use it? Well, hmmm. This needs three turns of build-up to go off. For which you're getting a pretty small reward. Dunno.

I like the idea that the payoff is a fairly hefty thing. The payoff on Zektar Shrine Expedition, Ior Ruin Expedition etc always seemed a bit lame. The idea here is pretty similar to Quest for the Gemblades.

it seems alright for one cycle to have the same reward. but i wouldn't want every common quest to pass out counters.

Good point, I was mostly thinking of one cycle, if there's more than that having two cycles would be reasonable. (Or a cycle of creatures with quests, or similar.)