May MCC -- Round 1 -- The Near Future

[netn10]

(Thanks to bravelion83 for the core set MCC logo. The art is a remix of Feed the Swarm by Andrey Kuzinskiy and Referee Squad by Steven Belledin)

May MCC Round 1
The Near Future

Our theme for the month of May is "nothing is impossible." In the last few years, Magic has expended to be weirder, wordier, bolder, and more and more innovative. Things we couldn't imagine are now in the game, from Stickers to outside components to affinity in as an evergreen mechanic. Let's explore what it all could mean.


Main Challenge -- Design a rare mono blue card with vigilance or a mono black card with "destroy target enchantment".

Subchallenge 1 -- Your card has only evergreen abilities.

Subchallenge 2 -- Your card has flavor text with the word "future" or "possibility".

Clarifications

Show

Hide

Subchallenge 1 - Your card should only have evergreen abilities, including vigilance or "destroy target enchantment". Your card cannot have abilities such as Evolve or Mutate, but it can have abilities such as Flying, First Strike, and others. The card can also have any triggered, activated, or static abilities, but not keyworded ones."

Example 1: A blue card with vigilance can have flying, "this creature can't be blocked", "whenever ~ attacks, draw a card" and/or "1B, T: Destroy target enchantment you don't control", but it can't have Evoke or Constellation.

Example 2: A black card with "Destroy target enchantment." can have "you don't control", "draw a card", scry 2 but it can't have Spectacle or give shield counters.

The full list can be found here.

DEADLINES

Design deadline: May 7th 2023 at 23:59 Eastern Time

Judging deadline: May 10th 2023 at 23:59 Eastern Time


RUBRIC

MCC Rubric

Show

Hide

The MCC Rubric is given below, in an easily "copy and pasted" form.

---

Code: Select all

[b]Design[/b]
[b](X/3) Appeal[/b] - Do the different player psychographics (Timmy/Johhny/Spike) have a use for the card?
[b](X/3) Elegance[/b] - Is the card easily understandable at a glance? Do all the flavor and mechanics combined as a whole make sense?
 
[b]Development[/b]
[b](X/3) Viability[/b] - How well does the card fit into the color wheel? Does it break or bend the rules of the game? Is it the appropriate rarity?
[b](X/3) Balance[/b] - Does the card have a power level appropriate for contemporary constructed/limited environments without breaking them? Does it play well in casual and multiplayer formats? Does it create or fit into a deck/archetype? Does it create an oppressive environment?
 
[b]Creativity[/b]
[b](X/3) Uniqueness[/b] - Has a card like this ever been printed before? Does it use new mechanics, ideas, or design space? Does it combine old ideas in a new way? Overall, does it feel "fresh"?
[b](X/3) Flavor[/b] - Does the name seem realistic for a card? Does the flavor text sound professional? Do all the flavor elements synch together to please Vorthos players?
 
[b]Polish[/b]
[b](X/3) Quality[/b] - Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
[b](X/2) Main Challenge (*)[/b] - Was the main challenge satisfied? Was it approached in a unique or interesting way? Does the card fit the intent of the challenge?
[b](X/2) Subchallenges[/b] - One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
 
[b]Total: X/25[/b]
*An entry with 0 points here is subject to disqualification.

JUDGES

netn10
bravelion83

If you want to consider judging, click here.


PLAYERS

If you want to play, just post a card anytime before the deadline.

[kwanyeegor-ii]

Irini Sengir, Spoiled Princess 4B
Legendary Creature - Dwarf Vampire (Rare)
Flying
Whenever Irini Sengir, Spoiled Princess deals combat damage to a player, destroy target enchantment that player controls.
Whenever an enchantment is put into a graveyard from the battlefield, put a +1/+1 counter on Irini Sengir. If that enchantment is green or white, its controller loses 3 life.
"The Baron ought to punish you!" yelled Eron. Irini just laughed and said "That's not even a possibility."
4/4

[Subject16]

Synapse Breaker 2U
Creature — Vedalken Wizard (R)
Vigilance, ward 1
U, T: Put a stun counter on Synapse Breaker and on target creature. (If a permanent with a stun counter would become untapped, remove one from it instead.)
U, Remove a stun counter from Synapse Breaker: Counter target noncreature spell unless its controller pays 2.
"You believe your future to be in your hands. It is not."
2/3

[Riria]

Positronic Paladin UUU
Artifact Creature — Construct Soldier (R)
Vigilance
T: Target creature you control gets +0/+3 and gains hexproof until end of turn.
At the beginning of your end step, if Holographic Paladin either didn't deal damage this turn or is untapped, sacrifice it.
Most gods deal with human unreliability by investing their holy warriors with immunity to fear and corruption. Or, as Abadar would put it, most gods are bad at math, and fail to see that giving their followers future tech requires a smaller intervention budget than three paladin levels.
2/5

[Venedrex]

Null Charm
Instant — (R)
Choose one —

• Destroy target enchantment. You lose 1 life.
• Return target creature card from your graveyard to your hand. You lose 2 life.
• Destroy target creature with mana value 1 or less. You lose 3 life.

Every form of magic holds the possibility to unravel.

[void_nothing]

Illusionist il-Kor 3U
Creature - Kor Wizard Mercenary (R)
Flying, vigilance
T: You may put an Illusion permanent card you own from your hand or exile onto the battlefield. That permanent gains "At the beginning of your upkeep, shuffle this permanent into its owner's library unless you pay U." Activate only if Illusionist il-Kor dealt combat damage to a player this turn.
"All you see before you is just as real as Rath's future."
2/3

[Ink-Treader]

Mordant Shadow 1B
Enchantment (R)
When Mordant Shadow enters the battlefield, destroy target creature or enchantment you don't control.
At the beginning of your upkeep, you lose 1 life.
1B, Discard a card: Create a token copy of Mordant Shadow. Activate only if Mordant Shadow isn't a token and only as a sorcery.

[Rithaniel]

Deja Vu
Creature - Incarnation R
Vigilance
Whenever Deja Vu attacks, at end of combat, you may exile each other creature that attacked this turn. If you do, return them to the battlefield at the beginning of your next attack step, tapped and attacking.
"I swear, I've seen this charge before."
2/4

[Freyleyes]

Sphinx of Fortune 3UU
Creature - Sphinx {R}
Flying, vigilance
When Sphinx of Fortune enters the battlefield, search your library for a nonland card. Target opponent guesses if it's a permanent or not. Reveal that card. If they guessed correct, they cast that card without paying its mana cost, else, put it into your hand.
"A future full of surprise."
4/4

[MonoRedMage]

Mudbutton Defiler 2B
Creature - Goblin Rogue {R}
Haste
Whenever Mudbutton Defiler deals combat damage to a player, destroy target enchantment or planeswalker that player controls with mana value equal to or less than the damage dealt.
R: Mudbutton Defiler gets +1/+0 until end of turn.
1/3

[slimytrout]

Triple-Sight Sorcerer 3UUU
Creature - Human Wizard (R)
Vigilance, ward 3
You may look at the top card of your library any time.
Once per turn, you may cast an instant or sorcery spell from your graveyard, your hand, or the top of your library without paying its mana cost.
"It is trivial to see the future if you truly know the past and present."
3/3

[netn10]

Time's up! We have a healthy contest with 10 players!

the top 4 of each bracket will advance.

Here are the randomized brackets:

netn10

Show

Hide

Rithaniel
Subject16
Riria
void_nothing
slimytrout

bravelion83

Show

Hide

kwanyeegor-ii
Ink-Treader
Freyleyes
MonoRedMage
Venedrex

[bravelion83]

Judgments complete. I haven't checked these for typos yet, so I apologize if there are any.

kwanyeegor-ii

Show

Hide

Irini Sengir, Spoiled Princess 4B
Legendary Creature - Dwarf Vampire (Rare)
Flying
Whenever Irini Sengir, Spoiled Princess deals combat damage to a player, destroy target enchantment that player controls.
Whenever an enchantment is put into a graveyard from the battlefield, put a +1/+1 counter on Irini Sengir. If that enchantment is green or white, its controller loses 3 life.
"The Baron ought to punish you!" yelled Eron. Irini just laughed and said "That's not even a possibility."
4/4

Design
Appeal 2.5/3 - A cool legend and relevant creature on the battlefield for Timmy. Johnny thanks you for not putting "you control" in the last trigger as this way he can sacrifice his own enchantments to it, possibly not green or white ones to avoid the life loss. Spike sees removal, and that always catches her attention, but it might be a little underwhelming to her for its mana value.
Elegance 2/3 - The only problem here is the little ambiguity I'll talk about in Quality. Yes, it's a corner case but it's there. Also, even if just for a single number and a single word ("3 life"), this goes beyond microtext limits (it's ten lines and three breaks in the MSE M15 frame, one break too many).
Development
Viability 2.5/3 - I see no problems with the color pie or rarity. It works in the rules, but there might be small issues due to the wording of the last sentence (present vs. past tense, see Quality).
Balance 3/3 - Rate and mana cost look right to me. You would probably play a 4/4 flyer for five mana in limited even if it didn't have additional upside. In constructed, that's not automatic, but I can see this being tried out in Standard, at least as a sideboard card against enchantment decks if they are relevant in the format. The more enchantments are played in the environment, the better this is. In formats with enchantment creatures (like those from Theros or Kamigawa), the playability also increases and by quite a lot, as the first triggered ability doubles up as creature removal too. That's also true if there are few playable enchantments but very strong, so strong that they might require an answer by themselves. For example, Fable of the Mirror-Breaker in current Standard comes to mind. I see no problems in casual and multiplayer.
Creativity
Uniqueness 2.5/3 - I remember in the preview panel a few days ago at Pro Tour MOM in Minneapolis they briefly talked about an Abzan-colored Enchantress Commander deck coming out in a future product. I can't remember which product it was right now, but what I do remember is them asking the question: "how do we add black to an Enchantress deck?", and then the answer was: "interacting with enchantments in the graveyard". That's exactly what you're doing here. I feel like this card could fit well in that future deck, like if it could actually come from there. It's new design space, but that we already know will get explored for real very soon. Another factor to consider is that enchantment destruction feels new in black now because it's a recent addition, but would this card still feel fresh in some years when it will have become the norm?
Flavor 3/3 - Homelands is too far back for me to know well. The only thing I knew here was the last name "Sengir", and at first I thought you made this character up, and I was about to say that it felt really odd as a Dwarf. Then I thought it vest to check the Wiki and now I'm very happy I did. Not only she's an established existing character, but she already has a card, and this card fits very well with the way she's described there. Just check out the sentence: "She also became a talented enchantress: she has learned to unweave the magics of others and has become adept in unraveling the spells of her father's enemies." I didn't know her before but yes, after reading about and learning who she is, I can totally recognize her here. Eron is also a real character from Homelands, even if I wasn't able to find any signs of direct interaction between them, but it's clear that you know what you're doing here.
Polish
Quality 2/3 - Hyphen instead of em dash in the type line. Normally I would accept it if everybody did it, but there is a card in my bracket that does it right, so I have to take it into account in this case, I'm sorry. (-0.5) In the last ability, "is" should be "was" (-0.5), as when the check happens on resolution, the "dead" enchantment is already in the graveyard and not on the battlefield anymore. It changed zones, so it's a new object with no relation or memory of its previous existence on the battlefield and the game uses the last known information of the permanent as it was on the last moment that it was on the battlefield. Check out the wording of Gloomlance for example. That card destroys a creature and then it looks at how is last "was" on the battlefield, it doesn't check the creature card that's now in the graveyard because it's not the same object anymore as it changed zones. That's exactly what's going on here if you just change the word "creature" on Gloomlance to "enchantment". The logic is exactly the same. And if you're wondering how this could be relevant, imagine that you had both a monored enchantment and some kind of continuous effect that makes all enchantments green and/or white (doesn't matter if it's "in addition to its other colors" or not). That continuous effect applies only on the battlefield, so that enchantment on the battlefield is no longer monored, but RG or RW. Your opponent targets that enchantment with Irini's "combat damage" ability, which resolves and destroys it, which triggers the last ability that gets put onto the stack. When it resolves, will you lose 3 life or not? The enchantment that triggered the last ability was green or white while on the battlefield, but when that ability resolves it's already in the graveyard, where it is monored because the effect that made it green or white doesn't apply in the graveyard. Do you count the RG or RW enchantment on the battlefield, or the monored enchantment card in the graveyard? In the former case (last known information, which is how it actually works), you will lose 3 life but the enchantment is no longer on the battlefield, so the present tense is wrong. In the latter case (not how the current rules work), you wouldn't lose 3 life but the present tense would be accurate because you check the card as it currently is. But no, the rules actually check how it was (past tense) as it last was on the battlefield.
Main Challenge 2/2 - All good.
Subchallenges 2/2 - Both met.
TOTAL 21.5/25

Ink-Treader

Show

Hide

Mordant Shadow 1B
Enchantment (R)
When Mordant Shadow enters the battlefield, destroy target creature or enchantment you don't control.
At the beginning of your upkeep, you lose 1 life.
1B, Discard a card: Create a token copy of Mordant Shadow. Activate only if Mordant Shadow isn't a token and only as a sorcery.

Design
Appeal 2/3 - Timmy just doesn't care, and at the contrary he would probably avoid playing with this just because of the life loss. Johnny can do tricks with the activated ability. Spike sees removal that also hits creatures at a low cost and she doesn't mind drawbacks, she will love this card. This card has been made for her.
Elegance 3/3 - No problems here.
Development
Viability 3/3 - No problems with the color pie, rarity, or the rules.
Balance 2.5/3 - The mana cost looks too low and exactly right at the same time. Universal repeatable removal is too much for just two mana and the drawback of losing 1 life each turn looks like something easily manageable, but if you do repeat it that life loss will soon become quite relevant. The first time you do it you're definitely getting more than enough for the cost, but then you will be wary of doing it too much. How much would a repeatable Murder that also hits enchantments cost? Without drawback, I'd say four mana at the very least. If the drawback enough to bring the mana value down to two? I'm not sure. This is one of those questions that only actual playtest could answer. Anyway, this is strong removal, which is always relevant in both limited and constructed. The life loss might not be that fun to some casual players, but that doesn't look like a big problem to me. I see no problems in multiplayer.
Creativity
Uniqueness 2/3 - This card feels to me like the sum of known elements: Mortify plus a drawback we see all the time (life loss on upkeep) plus Pack Rat. It's like a mash-up song where the lyrics come from a famous song and the music from a different famous song, but they fit naturally with one another. To me, the feeling I get from this card is exactly that.
Flavor 1.5/3 - The name works just fine, even if it feels a bit generic to me. No flavor text even if there is room for it here.
Polish
Quality 2.5/3 - In the last ability, the words "token copy" should be "token that's a copy". See for example Progenitor Mimic. (-0.5)
Main Challenge 2/2 - All good.
Subchallenges 1/2 - No flavor text.
TOTAL 19.5/25

Freyleyes

Show

Hide

Sphinx of Fortune 3UU
Creature - Sphinx {R}
Flying, vigilance
When Sphinx of Fortune enters the battlefield, search your library for a nonland card. Target opponent guesses if it's a permanent or not. Reveal that card. If they guessed correct, they cast that card without paying its mana cost, else, put it into your hand.
"A future full of surprise."
4/4

Design
Appeal 3/3 - Big enough creature with an exciting and risky ETB ability for Timmy. Johnny will try to tutor for combo pieces and cheat the guessing game if there's a way. If there is one, he will be the one to find it. Spike just loves the mind games she gets to play with her opponent with that ability.
Elegance 2.5/3 - The triggered ability is a bit laborious to resolve, but the instructions are easy to understand, you just have to follow them step by step.
Development
Viability 3/3 - No problems with the color pie, rarity, or the rules. I'm a bit surprised that this wording does indeed work as is, but I've made my research and there are a couple valid precedents. A little refining is needed but nothing big and nothing functional, so that belongs in Quality and not here.
Balance 2.5/3 - Strictly better than Serra Sphinx, but that's not a problem, especially for a rare. I see the triggered ability as mostly a drawback, honestly. If they're correct, THEY get to cast YOUR card for free! Ok, if they're wrong you get to draw that card you tutored for, and that's strong, but I'm not sure if it's strong enough to be comparable. Interesting thoughts from a Spike perspective: what are the better odds as the opponent? Always say "permanent" or always say "not a permanent"? I don't think it's a 50/50, I think if you always say "permanent" you will get more hits. Also, what's better from your own perspective instead? Tutoring for Emrakul or Llanowar Elves? Cruel Ultimatum or Lightning Bolt? Do I want to tutor for a high mana value card, thus maximizing the mana gain, but with the risk of them getting to cast my own big spell for free, or a low mana value card to minimize the risk of them getting it for free? A lot of questions I honestly do not have the answers for, and that will cause big mind games and give you the chance for bluffing if you want. Definitely not my own style of play, even though I do identify as a Spike (more Spike than Timmy at this point, even if I definitely have both components), but as Maro often says, it just means that this card is not for me, not that it shouldn't exist or that it's not balanced. For example, the fact that the ETB could backfire would be enough for me NOT to play this card ever, the risk would be enough for me not to want to even touch this card ever, but I can definitely see some players being the exact opposite. I think this would be a very polarizing card. The base stats are definitely enough to be played in limited if you're fine with the risk, and I can see some decks in Standard trying this as a finisher, especially control ones that can somehow try to play around the drawback (I don't know how, ask that to Johnny). Big impact card for casual. In multiplayer, politics (another thing I hate in Magic but that is loved by other players instead) will play a huge role here in deciding who will be the one to guess and potentially get the card for free.
Creativity
Uniqueness 2.5/3 - The design space this plays in feels a little similar to cards like Fact or Fiction or Gifts Ungiven, but this card adds its own twist to it.
Flavor 3/3 - Very good. A sphinx asking riddles and giving cryptic hints about the future is classic flavor, but it still works perfectly.
Polish
Quality 1/3 - Hyphen instead of em dash in the type line. Normally I would accept it if everybody did it, but there is a card in my bracket that does it right, so I have to take it into account in this case, I'm sorry. (-0.5) It should be "...guesses if it's a permanent card or not." It's still a card in your library at that point. (-0.5) The part after "without paying its mana cost" should be its own separate sentence (-0.5) and start with the word "otherwise" and not "else" (-0.5): "...without paying its mana cost. Otherwise, put it into your hand." The only two cards that are eternal (as in "not silver border/acorn") and that do similar things confirm that the rest of the wording is correct: Liar's Pendulum from original Mirrodin and Master of Predicaments from M15.
Main Challenge 2/2 - All good.
Subchallenges 2/2 - Both met.
TOTAL 21.5/25

MonoRedMage

Show

Hide

Mudbutton Defiler 2B
Creature - Goblin Rogue {R}
Haste
Whenever Mudbutton Defiler deals combat damage to a player, destroy target enchantment or planeswalker that player controls with mana value equal to or less than the damage dealt.
R: Mudbutton Defiler gets +1/+0 until end of turn.
1/3

Design
Appeal 1/3 - Not much for Timmy here. Johnny likes the synergy between the abilities but I can't see much for him to do either. Spike likes the removal, especially the "or planeswalker" part. She wonders why this doesn't hit creatures too, but this card is not efficient enough for her anyway. It will cost her a lot of mana to get rid of unwanted permanents, while also requiring combat damage to be dealt without built-in evasion.
Elegance 3/3 - No problems here.
Development
Viability 3/3 - No problems with the color pie, rarity, or the rules.
Balance 3/3 - Very nice synergy between the abilities. Playable in limited, especially in BR of course but also in black decks without red as a "23rd card" as just a 1/3 with haste and additional upside for three mana. The haste is what could make this card relevant in Standard in my opinion. Without it I don't think it would have been even considered for competitive constructed. I see no problems in casual or multiplayer.
Creativity
Uniqueness 1/3 - Nothing really new here, sorry. Maybe the interaction of the mana value threshold with firebreathing, but it just feels like too much of a stretch in this area...
Flavor 2/3 - Lorwyn is one of my favorite sets and settings ever, and I had already started playing a couple years before so I did experience it first-hand. I still remember it very fondly, so I immediately recognized the name "Mudbutton". The flavor of a Lorwyn Boggart works perfectly here, but I really wish there was some flavor text here. Like, I badly wish it was there. It feels like a glaring omission to me here, and there is room for it without any problems.
Polish
Quality 2/3 - Hyphen instead of em dash in the type line. Normally I would accept it if everybody did it, but there is a card in my bracket that does it right, so I have to take it into account in this case, I'm sorry. (-0.5) The words "this way" are missing at the end of the triggered ability: "...the damage dealt this way." (-0.5)
Main Challenge 2/2 - All good.
Subchallenges 1/2 - No flavor text.
TOTAL 18/25

Venedrex

Show

Hide

Null Charm
Instant — (R)
Choose one —

• Destroy target enchantment. You lose 1 life.
• Return target creature card from your graveyard to your hand. You lose 2 life.
• Destroy target creature with mana value 1 or less. You lose 3 life.

Every form of magic holds the possibility to unravel.

Design
Appeal 2/3 - Nothing for Timmy here, but both Johnny and Spike will like this. The former especially likes the second mode, and might also look for ways to turn the life loss into a positive thing. The latter always likes charms for their very high flexibility.
Elegance 3/3 - No problems here. The 1-2-3 pattern of life loss is very nice here.
Development
Viability 2.5/3 - No problems with the color pie or the rules. It's true that this card is very flexible and that flexibility always makes a card more powerful and more worthy of high rarity, but I'm honestly not sure this couldn't have worked as a strong uncommon. Yes, it's just one mana but it's full of drawbacks...
Balance 3/3 - ...which I should talk about here as we need to start comparing rates and costs, and that's a Balance thing. Demistify costs one mana and is an instant (and also a common, keep that in mind for what I said earlier in Viability, but I'll reiterate here at the end). Black is meant to be tertiary in enchantment destruction, way worse than white and green, in this order, and you also have to take the flexibility into account, so adding one point of life loss to that mode feels appropriate to me. Raise Dead (also known as Return to Battle and most recently as Disentomb, man, I do hate functional reprints... all commons by the way) costs one mana but it's a sorcery. I'd say that making it an instant with added flexibility is worth the two points of life loss. Smother is an (uncommon) instant that nowadays wouldn't have the anti-regeneration clause. Lowering the mana value threshold from 3 to 1 would already be enough in my opinion to justify cutting one mana from the mana cost. "1 or less" is a very narrow range in Standard, I can only think of relevant targets in older formats. I'm not sure a three-point life loss is needed just for that. It's true that there is the added flexibility of a modal spell and that Disembowel (a common) for 1 would cost two mana (but still just a single black mana for X = 0), but 3 life feels like a bit too much for this last mode. I get that you were going for the 1-2-3 for Elegance, and that definitely helps there, and also that it's always better safe than sorry, but it still feels a little too much to me. Anyway, I can see that a lot of work and thought went into balancing this card. Finally, remember that point about rarity? Here we have all common modes (I'm also counting the Smother effect as probably common too because of the lower mana value threshold), and usually the sum of three common modes is an uncommon charm, not enough to be a rare. We've seen many precedents of this trend throughout the years, too many to be mentioned here. The life loss might turn some casual players away from this card at first, but that's no big deal. I see no problems in multiplayer.
Creativity
Uniqueness 2/3 - We've seen a lot of charms before. The addition of a life loss that increases going from one mode to the next is a new twist on that classic concept.
Flavor 2.5/3 - Well, of course this is a charm, no problems about it. We've seen many of them, so many that the flavor of a charm doesn't really feel that exciting or original to me anymore. The name and flavor text are good and do feel black though, even if the flavor text feels a bit too generic, as does the mechanical flavor. It's not a problem about this card, it's just that we've had so many before that this feels "just another charm", and the fact that this is mechanically just a mashup of generic black abilities doesn't help with that, and actually reinforces that genericity.
Polish
Quality 2.5/3 - This is the card I was referring when I was in previous judgments that it used em dashes right. Well, actually I meant after "choose one", but not in the type line. No dashes should be in the type line as this card doesn't have a subtype. (-0.5) The unwanted spaces right before and after the modes are due to the use of "list" tags instead of inline bullet points (•), so that's a technical issue with how the forum software works and not your fault, so no deduction for that.
Main Challenge 2/2 - All good.
Subchallenges 2/2 - Both met.
TOTAL 21.5/25

Results (bold advance)

Show

Hide

kwanyeegor-ii: 21.5
Freyleyes: 21.5
Venedrex: 21.5
Ink-Treader: 19.5
MonoRedMage: 18

[netn10]

Rithaniel

Show

Hide

Deja Vu
Creature - Incarnation R
Vigilance
Whenever Deja Vu attacks, at end of combat, you may exile each other
creature that attacked this turn. If you do, return them to the
battlefield at the beginning of your next attack step, tapped and
attacking.
"I swear, I've seen this charge before."
2/4

Design
Appeal (1/3)
The card seems to appeal the most to Johnny players, who will enjoy the repeatable blink effects, but may not be as exciting for Timmy players, who typically prefer more splashy and powerful cards, and a 2/4 for 4 with a hard to achieve trigger ability isn't either. Spike players may also find the card too slow and not fitting into any established decks.

Elegance (2/3)
the repeatable blink effect is balanced by the fact that the creatures must attack and survive in order to be blinked again. However, the templating of "at the beginning of your next attack step" may be confusing to some players and could cause memory issues.

Development
Viability (3/3)
The card fits well within the mono-blue color identity and doesn't seem to break any rules. The rarity seems appropriate.

Balance (3/3)
The card seems balanced for constructed and limited play, as its repeatable blink effect requires a combat step and therefore can be easily disrupted by removal or other combat tricks. It may also fit well into certain casual or multiplayer formats, but it doesn't seem to create any particularly oppressive or broken environments.

Creativity
Uniqueness (2/3)
While exiling and returning creatures is not a new mechanic, the unique twist of returning them tapped and attacking is a fresh design space that could be explored more. The card also provides a unique take on an attacking-centric mono-blue creature, which is not typically seen in Magic.

Flavor (1.5/3)
The card's name is generic and does not fully convey the concept of "Deja Vu," which could have been better incorporated into the design
or flavor. In other words, when you think "Deja Vu", a creature that blink other creatures on combat is probably not the first thing that
comes into your mind. The flavor text is also somewhat generic and lacks context or a clear speaker, which detracts from the overall flavor of the card.

Polish
Quality (2/3)
"Whenever Deja Vu attacks, at end of combat, ..." the "at the end of combat should be at the end of the effect. (E.G:
Clockwork Vorrac)
"... attack step, tapped and attacking" - the comma shouldn't be there.

Main Challenge (2/2)
The card satisfies the main challenge by meeting the requirements for a rare mono-blue card with vigilance.

Subchallenge 1 (1/1)
The card only has evergreen abilities, satisfying the first subchallenge.

Subchallenge 2 (0/1)
The card does not have flavor text with the word "future" or "possibility," failing to meet the second subchallenge.

Total: 17.5/25

Subject16

Show

Hide

Synapse Breaker 2U
Creature — Vedalken Wizard (R)
Vigilance, ward 1
U, T: Put a stun counter on Synapse Breaker and on target
creature. (If a permanent with a stun counter would become
untapped, remove one from it instead.)
U, Remove a stun counter from Synapse Breaker: Counter
target noncreature spell unless its controller pays 2.
"You believe your future to be in your hands. It is not."
2/3

Design
Appeal (2/3)
Jonny may want to break this card by finding a way to repeatedly untap it. Spike might like a cheap Wizard with defensive capabilities that
can protect the board from mass removal, big creatures, and even sneak some damage in, and Timmy isn't interested in a 2/3 for 3.

Elegance (3/3)
Vigilance and ward 1 register in the mind of the reader as defensive abilities. The first activated ability is very symmetric
and clean, and it works well with vigilance. The second activated ability works with the first ability and provides a defensive ability
to the board, completing the package and tying it with a nice bow. The second ability doesn't require tapping, but locking your creature with the first ability balances it out. All in all, a neat package that might interest Mel.

Development
Viability (3/3)
The card fits well within the mono-blue color identity and doesn't seem to break any rules. Rare is appropriate.

Balance (2.5/3)
In competitive constructed, this might get played in a Wizard deck and/or against control, as it provides some nice defensive abilities
to the table. In limited, this card is a must-kill, alternating between an efficient tapper and a very cheap removal counter. Some
casual decks might enjoy this, but it also might look a little oppressive and intimidating to them.

Creativity
Uniqueness (2/3)
Using stun counters as a semi-removal is how stun counters are already used. Using them as a drawback is expected, but using BOTH at the same
time? Now that's interesting. The other parts of this card already exist, nothing groundbreaking here.

Flavor (2/3)
I had to Google "Synapse"', and breaking it seems... hardcore? Cruel? Phyrexian even? I can see this as pre-invasion Mirrodin Vedalken, cold
and calculated, using subjects in the name of progress, but then the flavor text of this Vedalken scientist doesn't track. Why is the "future" tied to the subject's Synapse? And why do the Vedalken stun themselves as well as the subject? Is the Vedalken breaking their own Synapse or are they just working hard and getting tired?

Polish
Quality (3/3)
All good.

Main Challenge (2/2)
The card satisfies the main challenge by meeting the requirements for a rare mono-blue card with vigilance.

Subchallenge 1 (1/1)
The card only has evergreen abilities, satisfying the first subchallenge.

Subchallenge 2 (1/1)
The card has "future" in its flavor text, satisfying the second subchallenge.

Total: 21.5/25

Riria

Show

Hide

Positronic Paladin UUU
Artifact Creature — Construct Soldier (R)
Vigilance
T: Target creature you control gets +0/+3 and gains
hexproof until end of turn.
At the beginning of your end step, if Holographic Paladin either
didn't deal damage this turn or is untapped, sacrifice it.
Most gods deal with human unreliability by investing their holy
warriors with immunity to fear and corruption. Or, as Abadar would put
it, most gods are bad at math, and fail to see that giving their
followers future tech requires a smaller intervention budget than
three paladin levels.
2/5

Design
Appeal (1.5/3)
Johnny won't work the effort to repeatedly untap something that
doesn't really combo. Spike sees a restrictive UUU mana
for a repeatable hexproof granter and immediately glee for mono-blue
devotion. Timmy might like a 2/5 for 3 with a lot of abilities, but
then they see the drawback and some might not think it's worth the
effort.

Elegance (2.5/3)
Vigilance and tap ability - a match made in heaven for blue. It just
makes so much sense. The tap ability reads cleanly, but it's a 0 mana
repeatable hexproof. The last ability is a "read-twice" ability
though, the kind of "is it only on my turn? Deal/dealt?

Development
Viability (3/3)
The card fits well within the mono-blue color identity and doesn't
seem to break any rules. Rare is more than appropriate.

Balance (3/3)
In competitive constructed, this might get played in mono blue
devotion. The mana cost, after all, is pretty restrictive. In limited,
this card is a must-kill, but then again, the mana cost makes sure it
won't be as oppressive. Casual players would see the drawback and
bounce off, and/or the budget mana base won't support.
I want to add that the triple U mana cost really pulls
all the balancing act here. In any other circumstance, a 2/5 vigilance
and repeated hexproof for 3 would be shoved everywhere, but you
managed to find a clean drawback for it - I say a better and cleaner
drawback than the actual drawback that is the trigger ability. Most
creatures with a tap for protection ability can only target other
creatures, so it might be a concern.

Creativity
Uniqueness (2.5/3)
The drawback is entirely unique. The mana value was seen before but
only on 4 creatures (3 if we discount Cheatyface). A 2/5
for 3 in mono blue is unheard of, and it makes a lot of sense, as well
as repeated hexproof. You took familiar abilities and tuned them to
eleven.

Flavor (2/3)
The flavor of the card is somewhat confusing. The name "Positronic
Paladin" suggests a futuristic or sci-fi theme, which is supported by
the card's abilities such as the repeated hexproof ability. However,
the flavor text mentions Abadar, who is a deity from the Pathfinder
role-playing game. It's unclear if this card is supposed to be from
the Universes Beyond line, which includes cards from other
intellectual properties, or if it's just a flavor mishmash.

Polish
Quality (1.5/3)
The card have a lot of lines, they fit but the font would be small.
Also the card name is "Positronic Paladin" but the rules text mentions
"Holographic Paladin".

Main Challenge (2/2)
The card satisfies the main challenge by meeting the requirements for
a rare mono-blue card with vigilance.

Subchallenge 1 (1/1)
The card only has evergreen abilities, satisfying the first subchallenge.

Subchallenge 2 (1/1)
The word "future" is in the flavor text.

Total: 20/25

void_nothing

Show

Hide

Illusionist il-Kor 3U
Creature - Kor Wizard Mercenary color=gold[/color]
Flying, vigilance
T: You may put an Illusion permanent card you own from
your hand or exile onto the battlefield. That permanent gains "At the
beginning of your upkeep, shuffle this permanent into its owner's
library unless you pay U." Activate only if Illusionist
il-Kor dealt combat damage to a player this turn.
"All you see before you is just as real as Rath's future."
2/3

Design
Appeal (2/3)
Johnny's mind races with the possibility of exiling a whole library of illusions and then dumping all of them onto the battlefield with this and repeated untap effects. Spike looks at a 2/3 for 4 mana and shrugs. Timmy is on the fence - a 2/3 for 4 is very small, but it can cheat out large illusions from their hand, but the effort to exile them in the first place probably isn't worth it for Timmy.

Elegance (1.5/3)
It's a tap ability with vigilance, you can't go wrong with that. The first line might be confusing - can I put an illusion from my opponent's exile onto the battlefield? It doesn't explicitly say "your exile" after all. The drawback is a repeatable trigger, which is a huge headache to track without a proper counter.

Development
Viability (3/3)
The card fits well within the mono-blue color identity and doesn't seem to break any rules. Rare is more than appropriate.

Balance (2/3)
In competitive constructed, even if illusions tribal is somehow competitive, this creature itself isn't an illusion and probably isn't
worth the effort. In limited, you need to build around this, but even if your deck is full of Illusions, you would most of time be better of
just casting them. Casual players would see the drawback and bounce off, and/or the budget mana baדe won't support. Pulling off creatures
from exile is a concern, as we don't want exile to feel like "just another hand or graveyard."

Creativity
Uniqueness (2/3)
It's a never-before-seen drawback with tension between vigilance, tap ability, and "Activate only if Illusionist il-Kor dealt combat damage
to a player this turn.". Also, it pulls creatures from exile, which, while it might be broken or not, is certainly unique.

Flavor (2/3)
There are 3 Il-Kor in Magic: two are mono-blue rogues with shadow, and one is white-black, which might resemble a more "modern" take on the
Il-Kor. This card is a huge departure from what we know of the Il-Kor of Rath. Mercenary and illusions can be closely tied to the Il-Kor being rogues, so I can buy it, but wizard is, again, confusing. The flavor text is also confusing - is the Kor trying to lie to me? Or is the Kor conjuring their home and letting me see where they came from? Perhaps the intent of the flavor text is to be confusing and thus sell the "illusionist" part, and if so, I love it.

Polish
Quality (3/3)
Everything looks good.

Main Challenge (2/2)
The card satisfies the main challenge by meeting the requirements for a rare mono-blue card with vigilance.

Subchallenge 1 (1/1)
The card only has evergreen abilities, satisfying the first subchallenge.

Subchallenge 2 (1/1)
The word "future" is in the flavor text.

Total: 19.5/25

slimytrout

Show

Hide

Triple-Sight Sorcerer 3UUU
Creature - Human Wizard (R)
Vigilance, ward 3
You may look at the top card of your library any time.
Once per turn, you may cast an instant or sorcery spell from your
graveyard, your hand, or the top of your library without paying its
mana cost.
"It is trivial to see the future if you truly know the past and present."
3/3

Design
Appeal (2.5/3)
Johnny wants to drop this and then proceed to cast the coolest spell you've ever seen for free. Scratch that, they're just going to exploit
the "bug" here (more on that in the Balance section). Spike might play this as a top-end finisher in a control vs. control matchup. Timmy doesn't like a 3/3 for 6 at all, but casting a 12-mana sorcery for free? Intriguing.

Elegance (3/3)
The "triple" theme here is very clean, from "triple sight," 3/3, three lines of text, ward 3, the three places you cast free
spells from, and also vigilance as a flavor bridge of "sight," the second ability that works with the third ability, and probably more little connections that make this card a whole package that, the more you look at, the more you smile.

Development
Viability (2/3)
The card fits well within the mono-blue color identity and doesn't seem to break any rules. Rare is good, but this card screams Mythic.
As for the "bug." If you blink this and it returns to the battlefield at the same turn, you get to cast another instant or sorcery for free.
Playing this and then casting every single blink spell from the top of your library until you hit a land sure sounds fun but unintuitive to
new players. Is it broken? Probably not, but to some players, it would feel like it isn't how it suppose to happen.

Balance (3/3)
In competitive constructed, I can see it either playing a major role in mirror matches or not at all because of its restrictive mana cost.
In limited, if you build around this, you will win the game; otherwise, you would wish you got a removal instead. This might be acasual all-star by the sole fact that it lets you cast spells for free from a lot of zones. All in all, the floor is a 3/3 for six and the ceiling is supporting the best instants and sorceries of your deck, which in my opinion is a good place to be.

Creativity
Uniqueness (2/3)
Casting spells for free from one zone is a blue classic, as well as casting from the top. Upping it to 3 zones gives it some unique points. Other than that, it's not groundbreaking.

Flavor (2.5/3)
The flavor hits just right. As I eluded to from the Balance section, the "triple" theme here pulls a lot of weight. It makes the card
clean, symmetric, and a cohesive package. The only gripe I have is that "Triple-Sight Sorcerer" is a pretty generic name.

Polish
Quality (3/3)
Everything looks good.

Main Challenge (2/2)
The card satisfies the main challenge by meeting the requirements for a rare mono-blue card with vigilance.

Subchallenge 1 (1/1)
The card only has evergreen abilities, satisfying the first subchallenge.

Subchallenge 2 (1/1)
The word "future" is in the flavor text.

Total: 22/25

Scores (bold advance)

Show

Hide

slimytrout = 22
Subject16 = 21.5
Riria = 20
void_nothing = 19.5
Rithaniel = 17.5