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 2025-05-19 01:55:45)
I keep thinking of blocks that pair too well together, like Kamigawa plus Innistrad (which had a Spirit tribal theme), or Mirrodin plus Alara (Esper's artifact theme). It's hard to find the right level of disconnect.
Mmm, I've been thinking "Ok; uh, The Dark plus... um, Mirrodin? Uh; how about fallen empires plus... maybe not. Wut?" and basically stumped completely.
It's a shame, I thought this was really interesting, but there weren't any blocks I thought I knew well enough to be confident making a card specifically for.
I'll wait till after Easter before posting #73 in case a few of us suddenly come up with some ideas at the last minute.
Ah, it's been 5 days. I fear Challenge 72 may have been too much of a thinker. I've been noticing my challenges have been going too far into the philosophical as of lately, and this one seemed to go one step beyond.
Next time I post a challenge, I'll make sure to throw a nice softball over the plate, to balance things out some. I'm writing this comment to bump the post to the top of the queue, for now.
making Alex happy
I'd be very surprised if any of us got any of them close to right.
Welp. I didn't even come close to getting this one right.
Oh weird. Learned something new, I suppose.
Hmm, my CSS for gold artifacts appears to be broken. I'm sure Mage Slayer would have had golden name and type lines when I first wrote that CSS. (Edit: ...No, it seems like cmeister is just overriding the frame to not be gold. Oh well, that's your prerogative.)
Yes, I think this works fine. I think if Wizards printed it they'd be likely to let you change targets, because they basically always do, and so many players just assume that it works that way, and would misplay this as written.
Hmm? Ohh... apparently sense 2 is only British. Huh, I didn't realise that piece of slang didn't exist across the pond.
Also nifty with cycling.
Yeah, unfortunately Bloodrush isn't a keyword, so I had to spell it out.
By the way, how does one "twig?"
I think this works. Also synergizes nicely with forecast, in a weird unified Ravnica 4 color monstrosity.
For Challenge # 070. Deliberately doesn't let you change target.
Do the rules work? (Hopefully, this doubles your Bloodrush)
Ohh, he grants all your creature cards Bloodrush
. Took me a little while to twig that.
Would you rather have this or Volrath the Fallen? Probably a hard choice.
So, for example, let's say I chose Tempest and Lorwyn. I might make a card in Exodus with buyback that puts a +1/+1 counter on all creatures that share a creature type, then make a card for Lorwyn that could block creatures with Shadow, but didn't include the word Shadow, specifically.
It's probably worth mentioning that there was a time when Wizards didn't plan out their blocks in advance... Every block pre-Kamigawa was done in isolation from the other blocks around it. This all changed when Wizards dropped the ball between Odyssey and Onslaught block. R&D didn't know that Onslaught would be a tribal block... they just kind of stumbled upon it. But Odyssey was full of odd creature types... dwarves, cephalid and nantuko to name three. But Onslaught was also a continuation of the story from Odyssey... the end result was a very messy "Oh... all these Goblins and Elves just sort of showed up" response.
The good news is, this started Wizards on the path of thinking five sets ahead at all times, which has lent to a greater sense of cohesion in the game. Cards now aren't designed in a vacuum, but with an understanding of what is needed for this set, this block, and the block before and after it. But what if the blocks were unmoored from their respective years, and rehitched themselves to other blocks?
I think it's probably a lot easier than it looks, but I don't know much about the methodology behind decoding ciphers.
Work is lame. :-P
Huh. That looks crazy, but it also looks like another letter substitution. Some symbols are repeated far too often to represent whole words, like in traditional Chinese. The little circles seem to represent word breaks... it's probably easier than it looks. That, however, is where I stop because I have work to do. ;)
We'll call it a testament to the difficulty of the challenge. I mean, the whole point is to make something that looks right despite the fact that it doesn't look right. Or visa versa. There are no perfect cards in Challenge 71.
I made Ruric Thar, the Unbowed.
Also these seems like as good a place as any to ask if anyone is interested in trying to decode this.
For Challenge # 070.
This design really sucks. I don't know what I was thinking.