Random Generator gave me Avatar of Hope and Chandra, the Firebrand. Boo Ya! A planeswalker. Now we're talking. I'm not really sure if that ultimate rings, but I wanted three abilities that paired the Avatars three abilities with Chandra's three abilities directly. I think I'd rather it say "blocking creatures you control", but an ultimate that talks about blocking? Really? There's probably a better way to do this... maybe they should all become 4/9 avatars? You know what... I like that better. Editing.

It bothers me that the first ability only brings her to 8 loyalty, not the 9 needed for her ultimate. Could it be +2 instead of +1?

Hmm... that's an interesting point. How about if we add 4 loyalty counters? You're right... if you're at 3 or less life, you aren't long for the game anyway.

The +1 adds four counters now. I also increased her base to 5 loyalty to make the -9 more likely if you don't have 3 or less life, and allow you to keep Chandra after ultimating if you do have 3 or less life.

Make the ultimate tokens down to 3 4/9s that can block two creatures each. It then seems like it took a third of that power to make each token; instead of some fractional 6/9 thing :D

sorry, slight OCD there. But I think it fits better. A trio of stout defenders.

Maybe reach too?

2nd ability should sacrifice the creature at end of combat/turn, or cost more loyalty.

We've got mashup overkill with this one. I can add more abilities, but generally I try to streamline abilities out if I can, since every ability added takes something else away from the card.

So while sacrificing the creature isn't on the table, giving -2 to the second ability sounds fine. You're right amusuem, consistent, repeatable, flying, doublestrike is a bit insane. Changed over.

As for 3 4/9s with block two creatures... hmm... it's not that I'm against the idea. I just wonder if that's enough of an ultimate to get the 'wow' effect. That, and the length of text required for 'with the ability "~ can block an additional creature"' means that I'd be taking up a lot of space for those words.

Bah, screw it. I'll add that, too (except makes four). We'll see how players respond to this when they ultimate. I'm keen to see how much information is too much, so I'll run a few leading questions past some players and see who bites. ­

Chandra can block creatures? lol

How about:

Sacrifice all creatures you control, then put [x] 4/9 red and white Avatar tokens tokens onto the battlefield, they have "This creature can block an additional creature.

were x is whatever final number you decide.

Whoops. Chandra should not be spontaneously blocking creatures. Changed over.

Oh, hey, I didn't even notice that i had set that ultimate to 6 to match Chandra's ultimate that mentions 6 damage to up to six creatures. Bargle.

Sacrificing creatures pulls us even further away from both cards, and adds even more text. That's the problem with 'Mashup: the Gathering'. There's a very fine line between creatively using the restrictions and just designing a different card.

Anywho, I'm reverting to 6 creatures, but I'm keeping the block an extra creature thingy. I still would like to see how people react to that.