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 2025-05-17 09:23:07)
The madatagious just seems confusing.
There's stuff that swaps control when it gets into combat; and that's a confusing thing you can maybe find a way to build around - but sometimes it whiffs? Or it's a big stompy creature that, um, the first tme you try and use it isn't yours any more? Not a fan. This ... ok, it's got the really odd "Cannot attack or block alone" restriction. So it's just a black-like "I'm bigger than I cost, because I've got a bad thing on me." I don't think being 5/5 haste makes up for that, and I ''like'' Bottle of Suleiman
The bottle has a nice "I'm losing, what the heck, let's risk it" quality, that this doesn't really.
But; most people don't like that. To quote Maro: "Candy or money is a nice risk, Candy or punched-nose isn't so much fun."
Vorrac Tailbiter.
For Challenge # 082. When I started reading Jack's entry, I expected to see this for some reason. So I made this. Hey, ho.
Hey, Vitenka! I'm curious; does this card read as 'better' to you than Madtagious Efreet, since it's blatantly all downside? Or does the frustrating possibility of the Efreet possibly having some positive combo attached to it make you like that card more? If a card has a drawback, do you feel it should own that drawback?
Quicklime RW sacrifice attacking or blocking creature at random.
For Challenge # 082
I asked myself, what other colours "at random" would look like. I didn't yet got a lot that didn't want some red (although there are plenty of existing cards in all colours that are random, but not blatantly so).
This is the RW version of Celestial Flare.
I wasn't sure how much wizards allowed you to force players to sacrifice creatures, as it bypasses a lot of protection/regeneration/etc. But as long as you're not choosing the creature, it seems ok (or it is on Celestial Flare).
CD is an awkward cost. It's harder to cast than most two-cost spells, as witnessed by the guild charms being quite good. Would you ever play this over Boros Charm? Not normally, but yes if you want creature removal.
It could be hybrid -- white can do "random" and red can do "attacking or blocking". But it's more natural as a two-colour spell, although I wish I could stop making red just contribute "at random" to two-colour combinations.
V's reaction is the same reaction people often have to Alms Beast. "Why would I want to do that?" But the idea is it can whittle through the opponent's blockers and then start smashing large amounts of face.
I was thinking of d&d when I made the flavor text.
Dealing 8 damage to the opponent? Your deck is full of goblins and your opponent's deck is mid-range? Pyroclasm? Unsummon?
I'm not really seeing an upside for attacking with this guy. Lure? Giving it evasion?
Added Madtagious Efreet.
For Challenge # 082. Most of the time, players are going to chump block this creature until he hits the other side of the field, then you chump block until he switches again, etc. Your opponent could, however, take a risk and double block the Efreet with a pair of Thragtusks. You feeling lucky?
I agree for the most part, Jack. If I was part of the development team, though, I'd probably push this creature to cost four or more, though. It can still have an efficient cost... I just wouldn't want it to be the reason why a player lost in the early game.
In Magic, though not in Christianity, demons are the intelligent evil lords and devils are the mischievous trouble-makers. The flavor text doesn't seem to match that.
Small templating niggle: it should be "choose target creature"
Heh, this is actually a subtheme in my Eluim block.
For the challenge I made Demon's Roulette
from Unfathomable Experiments
Curtain Call
For Challenge # 082
You want randomness? Here's randomness :) Take that Merfolk Looter!
I debated hosing Forbidden Alchemy as well, but decided "if an opponent would put a card into their hand, they put a card at random into their hand instead" was too ambiguous and clunky.
In fact, it feels silly hosing card filtering, when cards like Notion Thief straight-up hose card-draw, but I think this more-narrow effect can go on a much more efficient card.
Wizards normally avoid random-discard because it feels bad, but I think it's ok when that's obviously the point of the card.
I wanted to say "if a player", so the player has to play round the effect, possibly by playing red card-filtering which discards randomly anyway. But wizards are beginning to print this sort of effect as all-upside, unless it's obviously a hoop for jenny/johnny to jump through.
Dementia Devil, forcing opponents to random-discard.
I intended it to refer to any old dice, mainly just for the fun of it. It's got some precedent in Karplusan Minotaur which cares about all coins flipped, not just ones flipped to its ability. I agree it is possibly odd that one die roll will change all your Fickle Knights at once.
One option is to remove other abilities as you say. That works oddly in conjunction with Swiftfoot Boots, Guard Duty, and other such things, though.
Ah, that's right. I forgot about the test pilot. Oh well... I guess they're still in vaguely different mindspaces, though.
http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29983231/Rule_717_(Illegal_Actions)?pg=7 points out that even normal magic cards like Goblin Test Pilot have a similar "start casting random spell, and back up" rules loophole, and the consensus was there was no easy way to fix it, but you're not allowed to use the loophole deliberately. (So presumably if you have the lands available to cast the spell, you have to tap them for mana.)
If so, any solution that has rolling the die before targets are chosen would be at least as ok as some existing magic cards.
Maybe the simplest is just to say "Roll a die before targets are chosen". Or to add a line to the comprehensive rules that random effects happen before targets?
Definitely better. In fact, I appreciate the idea that this could combo with other die-rolling cards, but it seems confusing that two knights will always be in sync and can't be activated separately. If it just says "If the last number you rolled was..." does that refer only to the number rolled on dice used by this ability? Would that be clearer?
Or even, make it part of the resolution, "Roll a six-sided die. ~ loses all other abilities and gains... UEOT"?
Going by Goblin Test Pilot, this could be "target player chosen at random", I think.
One of the cards that makes you want to Donate Ivory Masks and then yoink them back at appropriate intervals. Which is a fun state to be in.
Whenever I think of "target player chosen at random", I can't help but recall a very memorable incident where I fired off the ultimate on Jace, the Mind Sculptor... forgetting that one of my opponents had Grip of Chaos on the table. We randomised who'd get hit, and it ended up... myself. 3 turns later, I died, killed by my own planeswalker.
one simplification: remove ETB ability