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 2025-08-24 10:02:53)
Nice! Same cost, too.
Pretty much printed! As Twin-Silk Spider. That's more blinkable, but basically the same card as this, so I'm claiming it :3
It lets you re-arrange blocking - your big creature didn't get blocked, your little creature didn't get killed; etc. It's a one-off, but it's a game winning "Oh, you dind't block something? My 8/8 that didn't even attack eats your face".
And, eesh, it's also a one-time untap too.
Phrasing is indeed kinda horrible. Maybe just "UEOT, each creature you control is a different creature you control" and then FAQ the heck out of it :)
Mercadian Masques
See Challenge # 165.
Not quite sure how to phrase this. Does the copy effect work without copying the result of another copy?
The idea is, you can permute your creatures however you please (but they go back to normal after this turn). I'm not sure what it should cost: it's usually worthless, but might be really useful occasionally. Or maybe it should only be a swap effect, but maybe usable more than once?
Beta and Tempest
See Challenge # 165.
Do non-programmers know about the "beta" version of the product? I debated if it should only work on artifacts, but I couldn't think of a good "broken" version except for creatures.
See Challenge # 165.
There's plenty of cards with a tempest theme already, but I felt there was SOME more room.
I avoided Shakespeare references :)
I couldn't decide if it should be "or more" or "or less". Or if it should be X or fix a number.
He did keep changing it so some of the books were consistent with earlier movies, not the earlier books, so I got quite confused.
2001 is really impressive, but also really confusing, so... that. I've still actually only seen parts of the film.
The first ability could actually be quite different: there needs to be SOME reason why a 1-cmc 4/9 is ok, so I picked "control a god" as a possible cost. But it could be something else entirely having some relationship to 2001/2010.
It's been a while, I don't really remember which events occur during which book in the series. Really enjoyed what happened in the Jupiter system
Oh wow, I really need to watch this 2001 movie, I've yet to see most of these classics.
This card IS a cool idea, like you said, just not super balanced... since it's halfway between a joke and a real card I'll stop backseat-developing, because it's a cool design/concept and if thats all that matters, that's cool.
I don't have any ideas for hidden costs or anything, I suppose you could add a CMC 4 or greater, but it feels kind of redundant since it's referring to Gods, which are almost always expensive mythics... Actually, maybe I'm just assuming that...
Anyway, It would also look nice to italicize the Ability word at the beginning of the text-box.
Yeah, I loved how well this worked out as a premise. I may have pushed my luck too far with Magic 2010 :)
Thank you!
Thank you, all.
They're a reference to 2010 specifically :) Mana cost/P/T as 1/4/9. The "sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" quote. The... whatever happened at the end of 2001. Turning Jupiter into a sun. I'd hoped to reference turning Europa into another earth but didn't fit it in.
I'm not really happy with the reference to Magic, but I'm not sure I can do better.
Froggy's right that it's probably not ok as is, but not sure what it SHOULD be. I did consider other ways of adding a hidden cost but didn't think of anything good. I think it's probably a joke that won't quite make it into a real card.
Yeah this is neat way to have Freeze and Bounce in one card... good job on the clever thought behind this!
Nice design!
'Kay my bad :)
Yeah, that changeling clause idea is pretty horrible, Froggy. It might need to cost more, but it definitely doesn't need that.
No, that's dumb. The whole point of changeling is to cheese creature type requirements. And both abilities are references to 2001: A Space Odyssey
I have a few ideas:
Definitely would specify the God creature doesn't have Changeling, because that means on turn two, play Universal Automaton and then this.
I'd probably make this cost 3 mana just so you can't get a turn 2 combo with it some other way... this means you'll likely have to wait until turn 3-5... which at that point opponents hopefully have answers or a better board state than this would cause.
I assume the land is so you can cast god spells? Otherwise im not sure how the two abilities fit together.
This was definitely not a set I imagined someone choosing! Nice interpretation
Magic 2010
See Challenge # 165.
As you can see, I had to put some effort in to turn "Magic 2010" into a card :) No idea how to balance it :)
Fifth Edition, Ice Age
See Challenge # 165.
So many possibilities with "Ice Age", but I bet almost anything has been done before and I don't have the energy to check all the possibilities.
I chose the set by choosing a random card and got Orcish Farmer. I realise, it's sort of lovely to see every day working non warrior orcs EVER. I can't remember the last time I ever saw an orc who wasn't actively fighting (or avoiding fighting, or subverting fighting...)
See Challenge # 165.
Not sure I've finished iterating on this. I wanted some sort of "five times" and the four card limit seemed like an obvious tie. I also considered keying off casting the same spell four times.
I was originally going to reward you for casting it FIVE times (with a flashback or copy effect etc), but I wasn't sure what the reward would be. This way, the fifth casting is itself a reward if it's the right spell. Although I'm not sure what spell is worth multiple castings that way. Also it doesn't explicitly say "book", is that obvious enough?
Should it be U or R?
I was going for I was going for mode 2 of Tooth and Nail with a sac requirement. If the player has one or less monocolored creatures in that hand, then yes, it's just niche, a off-color kill spell, at 6 mana. I'm comfortable with the card failing to do the desired objective and being played as removal as some miserable back-up card.
Seems pretty niche. Needs you to be playing dual-colour and two-colours. And to have the cards in hand. But it is also raw creature-destruction in pure-green, which seems out of place.
There's no broken image on my end. The cost is
.