Multiverse Design Challenge: Recent Activity
| Multiverse Design Challenge: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| All challenges | Upcoming Challenges | Make a new design challenge! | All challenges (text) |
Recent updates to Multiverse Design Challenge: (Generated at 2025-05-15 13:33:22)
I'd say this is fine. Kill spells in blue are rare, but this looks acceptable in my book. It ain't stopping no Rorix Bladewing from killing you. Not if the caliber of cards in your deck are other Curse of Shahrazads. ;) (Nice flavor, btw)
Well, you'd have to be careful about the artifacts you put in the set, and make sure there were no broken bombs at
and 
. This plus Cranial Plating, for example, is pretty nutso. But that's because Cranial Plating was nutso... Urza just happens to work well with it. Urza still has his starting cost, which, if this was a power mythic, would probably net us a 6/6 flyer... so all things considered, I'd call it fair unless proven broken.
I decided to decrease it by
. I think that makes it a bit more interesting without becoming too broken. Anything that can tutor for artifacts has the potential to become a problem in vintage, so I wanted to be careful of that.
Changed the mana cost of the ability to
rather than 
.
"But how can I sacrifice the card you're about to draw?"
Being sensible, yeah, it's a bit too cheap to kill a creature in blue; though it's nicely flavoured and nicely useless against "Choke on your card advantage, I keel you now!" decks.
Reminds me of Soul Ransom. My instincts say this might cost about
.
And in the same theme, Curse of Shahrazad
I did stop to wonder about colour, but this is just how it turned out. I'm not sure what colour Solomon would be; he was white on his previous card, but he's normally famous for being knowledgeable, wise, and just, which suggests U/W.
I think there's also a strain of self-aggrandisement which could be B, but that's not normally dwelled on. (It's probably more blatant with Saul and David.)
I'm not good at costing splashy things. In a good situation, this is a three-for-one, which seem to be quite rare even at expensive costs. So not sure.
Awesome. Funny that such a white character should have an iconic spell named after him in blue-black.
I think at uncommon or lower this would need to be seven mana, indeed. But at rare you could probably get away with being a little cheaper, even if just six. It's clearly powerful, but as a splashy duel deck preview card is allowed to be (not to mention as a two-colour rare sorcery).
Aww, I was expecting: Unless target player sacrifices a 5/5 creature, you gain 5 life.
He's in the Qur'an. It would be a pretty big oversight to ignore Solomon's celebrity status:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon_in_Islam
As for destroy two target creatures... I don't think there's been anything that straightforward, though there should be. Ashes to Ashes and Dead Ringers, but nothing without clauses that I know of. I guess you charge
for that privilege? Maybe more? Tough to say.
I do like this card, by the by. I'm a big fan of both Barrin's Spite and Retribution. How could I not like this?
Judgement of Sulieman
"unlike specters, this is blockable and thus killable easily." It doesn't need to deal damage to cause discard, only to attack. If you (as opposed to the opponent) need to control a legend before that effect triggers,
sounds fair, maybe even pushed to me.
unlike specters, this is blockable and thus killable easily. even in a legends block, i doubt it could trigger enough times to make the opponent fear it.
I think the key for narrow abilities (especially those that play very little in limited) is to make sure they are on top of desirable ones (here Bushido) with a mostly fair cost, hence why I offered up
for it. If the trigger is still attack, but now activates if you have a legend, 
seems to me a fair cost and will make it a powerful constructed card (being a specter that doesn't need to hit the enemy).
That would seem like the obvious choice. I'm not sure if Sorrow wants the obvious choice, though.
That said, after spending hours working with the Gatherer rating system, I can tell you narrow application is one of the key ingredients for some of the worst rated cards on Gatherer. People just don't like cards that are good situationaly. For example, there's nothing particularly wrong with Ignite Disorder... and it has the potential to wreck an aggro/tempo white and/or blue deck. Still, it rates 2.397 stars. That's roughly the same rating as Alpha Tyrranax or Angelic Blessing. In other words, limited filler. And that's for a fairly common requirement. Legends might pop heavy in a block, but, outside of EDH, they aren't really a common feature in regular magic.
My suggestion? Assuming Sorrow doesn't want to switch from "Opponent's Legends are bad" to "My Legends are good"? Switch to "Legends are a toggle switch". In other words, if 'Profane' is on, this might gain 'discard a card' but lose Bushido (casting cost would need to be changed, of course.) There's still a benefit, since you're in control of if and when you cast a Legend. It's a tactic that favors some Johnnies and some Spikes. Timmy hates toggles. But the way Blasphemous is now, no player demographic appreciates it, really. Some Spikes, but fewer than you'd imagine. Some uber-Johnnies, but only in tandem with "Make your creature a Legend".
i don't understand why it's called Profane. what does that have to with legends?
reading the comments above, maybe go the other way and have him support legends. that is, his ability only works if you control a legend. flavorwise it could be legends' supporters, making a more open theme that is easy to support and to understand.
Yeah, that was my thought too. Legendary is already a drawback, after all; this mechanic just makes it more so.
You know, I really like the space you carved out, Sorrow. Every shrine made is bound to make the shrines more and more powerful as a whole. But this is very niche. It's a powerful ability if another combo piece is in place, but rather useless without it. Certainly it works in tandem with the blue shrine... but it isn't an auto-include in every shrine deck. Personally, I think it would be kind of cool to see more shrines like these.
I doubt this would even be a common nowadays, what with the quality of creatures going up, and this being a bad card even for its time. That said, this is about as good a reprint one can expect from the source card.
I also love the fact that this continues to follow the 'I can't figure out if they're doing it on purpose, but the very bad cards in Magic have a tendency to discourage you from playing them in the flavor text' rule. :D
It would be a lot less trouble to write it out: "Whenever ~ attacks, if defending player controls a legendary permanent, that player discards a card." That's exactly what they did with Threshold after all.
Not sure if this couldn't be handled at
, especially at uncommon (compare Hand of Cruelty), but although I like the idea, I'm worried about a named mechanic that actually punishes what would probably be a theme of the set!.
It won't but it's a higher rarity, so hopefully it overlooks NWO. I added the second ability because I think the shrines need some kind of counter measure to make them more useable (since I decided to keep them legendary).
I think that there would be good enchantment support, so GW, and then probably U as a third color. Thinking about it, there might be a cycle of uncommon allied or enemy shrines in the set and one of those could be previewed too.
Profane I see being BWR.
Is the last ability meant to trigger when it gets removed due to the legend rule? It won't, but people might think it will.
I'm intrigued how many colours the Sacred deck would have. I guess even a 2-colour deck can have 3 Hondens if this is one of them. (Duel Deck previews don't usually include multiple in the same cycle so although Return to Kamigawa would presumably have five new ones, this duel deck would only have one new one plus some old ones.)
Functional reprints are fine to shift rarity, given that regular reprints can do. And yes, I'd say updating it to intimidate is still within the spirit of the challenge.
Heh, I hadn't heard of the Giants-Dodgers rivalry, but it sounds like it'd make a great duel deck. Pity that Goldmeadow Dodger can't fit the colours :>
This guy... turns the target into a Dimir Cutpurse as well as making it unblockable. Ouch! But the cost of
is sizeable, so... yeah, while it's eyebrow-raising it's probably also fair. Nice mythic.
Hee. It's certainly a fun card. Quite a tight mirror with Mishra, Artificer Prodigy.
The natural problem with keying off the converted mana costs of artifacts is affinity. But the
cost is hefty, and I think unbreaks this nicely. Say we drop this guy turn 3 off a Dimir Signet (something I've done with Mishra before), with any old one-drop artifact on turn 1. Turn 4 could be a Myr Enforcer, but you can't search up something hideous like Spine of Ish Sah or Magister Sphinx with this unless turn 1 was Sol Ring-Signet and turn 2 was Thran Dynamo.
So no, I think this is fun without being broken. (The
cost is fairly hefty, hefty enough that it interferes with the fun as well to some extent, but that's better than broken.)