Comments please! Power level OK? This is built mainly for Spike, so also try and help me keep it in that direction please.

Compare to Smoldering Efreet. I would say this is too pushed.

Way too good. 2 damage is not much of a drawback in the decks that would play this. Compare, I dunno, Firedrinker Satyr. It's a rare and deals (probably) a lot more damage to you, even ignoring the fire-breathing ability.

Whoah. Yeah, I'd say this is about right for rare, but still very good. At common I think the drawback doesn't matter, it means that in limited, aggro decks will be SO strong (and won't care about 2 life). Of course, if this isn't intended for limited, it doesn't matter, it would be fine.

I'm not sure where I'd take this. If it's aimed at constructed, you can make it rare and it's probably fine. If it's aimed at spike in limited, and you want to keep it common, you probably need to go up to 2 mana. If you want to keep it at one mana and common, it probably needs to be self-limited in some way, like spark elemental etc.

Better? It has to be common and be aimed towards Spike, those are the main parameters of the challenge (this is for an MTGSalvation challenge).

You know, funny thing about 2 power one mana creatures in limited. You would think they would be busted in half. I but definitely remember people passing on Goldmeadow Stalwart and Flamekin Bladewhirl when they easily could have played them. I could never figure out if they were being smart or daft. Two power seems so good on round one. But I think the Lorwyn environment just wasn't interested. Too easily trumped by a pile of early creatures.

Anyhow, you seem to have hit the weird spot in Magic, Samuel. Two damage isn't enough to not make this card balanced. But no amount of damage after that is reasonable. Even if this was a 2/1, I'd question the card's relevence. It's either too good, or it's terrible (power level-wise). It's possible 2/1 is just right, but only testing would prove that.

Ah, sorry, I didn't realise there was a specific challenge.

Definitely a lot better, but I think it's still too good for common. There's a few examples of 2/1 for R with a downside at uncommon, so this is probably well placed for that.

Unfortunately I really don't have a lot of experience costing cards for limited. I think the problem is that if this is playable at all, it tends to be REALLY GOOD in a red aggro deck, to the extent that people play that as often as possible. So one possibility is that I'm just wrong and it's not as strong as I think or it's ok to have a limited format with so many red decks. But another is, it needs to be more narrow -- either it gets worse if you play lots of these (remember there's no 4-card limit in limited), or it's good but only in some red aggro decks not all of them...

Oh, cool. OK, now looking pretty good. A bit like Torpid Moloch or Cinder Wall. I don't know why red gets ginormous defenders, but apparently it does :)

Still pretty strong -- the downside is fairly minimal for the benefit on either attack or defence. It might well still be too strong -- it's a very efficient attacker, even once, and as a defender is likely to cause a lot of games to stall since it might be turn 4 or later before the opponent has anything they want to attack into this with. But I'm not positive either way, so it's certainly in the right ballpark. And I definitely like it!

I like it. Wall of Torches that can attack once. Reminiscent also of Keldon Marauders and Spark Elemental.

Made cost more color-heavy for balance. Still Spiky enough?

I probably wouldn't play this in any format. Give it trample or something. [Frost Walker] is only borderline in Standard and while this doesn't have as big of a drawback, it still trades with a 1/1 goblin token.

How is it now?

In terms of constructed, haste doesn't make it that much better - random mana dorks or tokens still trade with it. It's pretty good against control decks, though.

Too pushed again now?