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 2025-08-25 15:53:21)
It would be ok as a niche mechanic, but I'd still like to see a version which could work at lower rarities. Eg. if it searched but you still had to pay the mana cost. Or if it only searched the top N cards.
I also think in limited (which is where rarities matter) it may be hard to get the right spells to cast with these creatures. The creature is most likely to die in combat, which means you get less utility from a lot of spells, and you have specific color requirements. I'm not sure how much of a difference that makes, but I wanted that to be some of the trade-off, how much you were willing to stretch your deck to include instant/sorceries of the right cost.
It should probably be a slightly less efficient creature, to piggy-back a spell on. You might not get to choose when you get the spell; but getting to choose which one it is is rather nice.
And, huh. It can get sorceries; but probably at a time when you can't cast sorceries? I guess end-of-combat isn't much better than main-2 for casting sorceries; so probably not a huge advantage, just an oddity.
I don't know that this is inherently rare. Treasure Keeper did basically this. That was a top-tier uncommon for its set, but partly because it was colourless and could go into any deck.
Additional costs aren't a problem either, because casting the spell without paying its mana cost you still pay the additional costs. So either you can pay the additional costs, in which case you do, or you can't, in which case you fail to cast the spell and it gets shuffled away.
But this mechanic is definitely inherent card advantage, making it very hard to balance for common. Even a 1/1 for
would be able to cast Brainstorm when it dies. That's possibly okay though - some mechanics, like imprint and aftermath, are still fun enough to print even though they don't work at common.
Ah, I can create cards from BEFORE the omniburst too.
Suicide Charger a doomed gobin.
Decadent Militia, another creature decay mechanic.
See Challenge # 157.
The wording isn't right here. The idea is to capture a feeling of decay, rather than making a creature wither itself away entirely, you get a -1/-1 counter but only once.
I chose attacks or blocks so you can get the full use out of it exactly once, but have to decide whether to use that immediately or not.
However, the wording is clunky, maybe it should be instead of damage even if that's stronger? But that's also fiddly.
Or maybe it should be once automatically, regardless of whether you used it or not?
ETA: And I chose to use -1/-1 counters for the decay flavour, but you could equally give it a +1/+1 and take it away.
See Challenge # 157.
Using the land count to create a periodic event I used elsewhere in this challenge.
Obviously I usually try to avoid drawback mechanics, I'm not sure if there's a more positive way of spinning this (a bonus if ... somehting doesn't happen?)
It aims to capture the flavour of before the omniburst, when the non-human races are still here but not long for this world.
Fixed the bug that was hiding the colour indicator when you explicitly set the hybrid frame on a card that was already auto-detected hybrid.
Burning Port, a dual land
See Challenge # 157.
Probably not printable, but I was imagining a cycle of lands of cities ruined by the omniburst.
Myriad Bridegroom
See Challenge # 157.
Apparently I like the myriad marriage rituals.
(the ability is always the same condition with a different bonus, usually a boost and sometimes something else.)
Thank you! I like these challenges.
You could also specify the cost in the ability instead of using the mana cost if you needed more flexibility.
It's okay for reminder text. The rules can handle the correct wording and specifications - it would be similar to "If you reduce the mana cost by
you are left with 
".
The only problem is that this would not take into account additional costs that are not mana costs which are hard to integrate into the wording.
Also searching your whole library is an issue of another sort. And this is pure card advantage - making this quite possibly rare - and giving this mechanic the "free spell" problem that you are potentially making the card stronger by increasing its cost or making it more color-heavy.
The question to me is less "could this be made under the rules?" as much as "should this be?" Though the idea is enticing.
This is very flavorful, but it might be a bit too strong.
to spend?" Or "you could cast with 
in your mana pool?" What a weird thing to try to word correctly.
Maybe "that you could cast if you had
This is very flavorful, but it might be a bit too strong.
to spend?" Or "you could cast with 
in your mana pool?" What a weird thing to try to word correctly.
Maybe "that you could cast if you had
I don't know that this level of repetitiveness is good, but I do love the pairing of the effect with the name "crescendo." Though... A crescendo means you're getting louder, and this causes you to return "quieter" spells to your hand. Shoot, now I'm overthinking. I like it.
I haven't been on Multiverse in a while. Jack V, it's nice to see you're still creating cards for this challenge over a month later!
I really like the flavor of the name and token-creating ability.
Or, instead, an ability that says, "when this dies, if you control no creatures, return it to the battlefield"?
I was thinking that, but I'm worried it feels worse when it actively anti-synergises with itself, even if that's stronger than requiring no creatures at all. Maybe it should go the other way and say "if you control no non-survivor creatures". Although even then, it feels like it's telling you not to play any at all, rather than "use this as a catch up mechanic if something goes wrong".
Maybe it should be an ability word with a variety of benefits. Or "draw N cards"?
"When this enters the battlefield, if you control less than \1 Survivors, create a number of 1/1 white Survivor creature tokens equal to the difference."?
Maybe "When this enters the battlefield, if you control no Survivors, create a 1/1 white Survivor creature token." so it's relevant mid/late game?
Spellblood Roc, with one of the most obvious spellbeast mechanics I forgot.
See Challenge # 157.
It occurred to me I hadn't done one of the most obvious variants on spellbeast mechanics. This tutors up a spell, but at an unpredictable time.
Is "you could cast for" ok in reminder text? I was aiming for, something costing 3U or "less", but including color. So mana cost 3U, 2U, 1U, U, 4, 3, 2, 1, or 0. But not "no mana cost" and not 2UU. That seems to avoid some problems, and be more intuitive.
Ability word is a good idea too, but survivor tokens make sense. I'd forgotten that was a creature type, not sure if "repopulate" needs to change, or maybe the name of this card. Or maybe "human nomad" should be the token too?
Come to think of it, this could also go on spells with "when you cast", would that be good, or dilute the flavour too much?
Was +1/+1 counter.