For Challenge # 073, randomly generating Challenge # 059 (Make a card with the words "You lose the game".) and Challenge # 094 (Make a card that only makes sense as a sorcery, never an instant.)

I got lucky. Both of these challenges are tricky to find new space in, but they complement each other well. In theory this could be an Instant. But the whole point is that you're opening yourself up to losing the game if this creature doesn't swing, so it only makes sense to give your opponent a proper chance to stop you.

What's with the name 'Atronicus'? What does it refer to?

That second phrase seems like it might be better expressed in some more concise way - maybe also testing out different card types such as creature or enchantment. How about devil tribal enchantment with "at the beginning of your end step, if a Devil didn't attack this turn (or devil didn't enter the battlefield this turn), you lose game"? Idk, man.

But! All in all, the design at it's core essence is quite beautiful. Well done!

Oh yes, nice combination. Although maybe it should be a creature? :)

If it's a creature then that "you lose the game" won't trigger if the Devil is removed (destroyed) - unless it creates a token or emblem apart from itself with that ability. Plus it's supposed to be a delayed trigger for the next turn only so there's that too. Maybe if the emblem exiles (expires) after you meet its condition? And then the name isn't really fitting for a creature so it loses lots of "flavor points".

Hmm, none of those alternatives seem any cleaner or better in general.

I was thinking something like "Lose the game if ~ leaves the battlefield or doesn't attack."

It's true, that's not exactly the same ability, it's different if you can win without it, or if you want to get one attack out of it and it's ok if it dies. If you think those circumstances are important, you could go with "Lose the game if ~ leaves the battlefield before the combat phase the turn after you cast it, or doesn't attack that phase."

Or if you REALLY want the same functionality, you could set up a delayed triggered ability, but I agree that wording is not nice.

I agree the name is great, but wizards usually choose a card first, then a name. I do think, the card is ok as is, but I'm conditioned to point one when something could usually be done differently.

(Maybe it could create two tokens? That would make sense as a sorcery?)

On 'Atronicus': For what it's worth, I thought about playing with both MTG myth and irl lore. I'm a big fan of Chernobog, and would have used him. But Chernobog, and many of his analogs, feel like demons. I wanted something that felt more like an MTG-flavored devil, just much, much bigger. So Atronicus isn't a reference to anything.

On whether this should be a creature or not: Thought about it, but most of my counter-argument is what Tahazzar said. To be honest, one of the things I was thinking of when I made this card was Pact of the Titan. That card could have been a creature with flash, but it isn't. I think it's cleaner this way.

As an aside, being a token makes this marginally more vulnerable. Not much... there's only a few corner cases where it matters. But Flicker wouldn't make you lose the game with the creature version. And sorcery speed bounce wouldn't stop you either, if you could cast it again and give it haste.

Technically, you could make the creature version make you lose the game if he left the battlefield... but I don't know... it starts to cut into the flavor of the card. At least that's the way I see it.

Fair enough, that makes sense. And FWIW, I am interested in who "Atronicus" might be.