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 2025-07-14 15:05:13)
Created for Challenge # 034, based on Alex's Strategy type from Challenge # 031.
I changed it so that designing a cycle is no longer part of the requirements of the challenge, since nobody was really doing that.
For Challenge # 034, inspired by tt's Spore Fiend.
For Challenge # 034, based on ttt3142s' Spore Fiend
I like the concept, but I'm not sure how Bosses should be balanced, given that you have have a variable ability to tailor you deck around them.
I'm not sure how they should be costed. Free? One mana? For a bigger cost more appropriate to the effect when you kill them?
What balance between effects and reward would make people want to play this?
Templating is also very difficult, since any words at all tend to fill up a Planeswalker's text boss
It's a little bit odd that this turns damage-to-planeswalker into damage-to-player, but I guess that's inevitable with bosses: you only use them if you want to invest the damage in something that's worth more than that amount of damage to the opponent.
This does seem pretty dominating. Flyers are usually a fairly scarce commodity, 3+ power of flyers especially so. I guess you are paying 6 mana, but I still think I'd rather see this something like 6/2.
BTW, I think I prefer "Colossal Creature" to "Enormous Creature". Or even "Colossal Hydra". Or even "Colossus" as a keyword. Colossus is a good word.
Hm. I agree it should be "what people expect". Thinking about it, I think Vorthos could go either way -- if you climb onto a giant colossus to attack it while it's attacking the planeswalker who summoned you, is that mutual combat or not? But I think I was led the wrong way by being too Melvin -- the rules are simpler if you just say "~ can be attacked" and all the usual rules about damage to creatures Just Work. You have to add another clause to have it deal damage back.
But you're right, that probably IS what people expect (and is another way to distinguish them from gideon jura). Or possibly, they should only deal damage if untapped, so if they attack, they can be outflanked later.
I don't know... I assumed it would deal damage back. I can see why you would think of them operating more like a Planeswalker than like a creature, but it would probably be unwise to fight against the player's perception of how combat normally works. Since, if you asked people what they thought would happen, like, 4/5 would assume that combat continues as normal, then that's probably what you should aim for.
For Challenge # 034, inspired by my Island Turtle.
The original wording for Enormous assumed that if the Enormous creature was attacked, it didn't automatically deal combat damage. But it could be that it does. I think the original decision was correct, but which works better?
I'm not sure how these should be balanced. I decided the place to start was assuming they could be a bit better than their mana cost, especially in having slightly more evasion, since the opponent can automatically get combat damage to them on their turn.
6/3 flying is pretty dominating in a limited game, but it's fairly easily answered if the opponent has any flying to attack back with?
I feel guilty, but since we've not many cycles submitted, I went ahead and made some of the simple creatures I envisaged with my Enormous mechanic, even though it's against the rules.
Cloud Fortress, Fire Serpent, Jungle Hydra
Well, if it was just once, then it's much worse than Simian Spirit Guide... since you could use that at instant speed, and it didn't take up a land drop. I agree, that's really, really hard to balance, but it seemed like one of the few times you could get away with "
: Add 
." so I went for it. If it looks too good, remove a gold counter. It's probably still a good card starting with 3... just not busted.
For Challenge # 034, inspired by my Island Turtle.
Thank you for expanding the Enormous mechanic!
LOL. I love the gold rush flavour. I originally assumed Enormous would only make sense on creatures (after all, other permanent types could use loyalty counters like planeswalkers), but the flavour here works well.
I'm not sure how it should be balanced; tapping for RR even once may well be too good, but I don't want to make it have to be tapped.
Yeah, trick counters were definitely one of my favourites of the possible mechanics. I like Alex's trigger conditions, they feel just right for "aha" moments :)
This is a really good idea, I feel bad I didn't have any real ideas for cycles. In the end, I decided to start with a few individual cards and hope to finish a cycle later.
So far, Sighted Eagles and Bull Cousins, also inspired by jmg's Old Man Rabbit
For Challenge # 034, inspired by jmgariepy's Old Man Rabbit
For Challenge # 034, inspired by jmgariepy's Old Man Rabbit