How To Train Year Dragon - Card Design Competition Discussion Thread

Competition Theme: How To Train Year Dragon

For this first competition, we'd like to see you create a card which utilises one of the keywords or mechanics introduced in the Year of the Dragon.

The full list of available keywords and mechanics is:

• Twinspell
• Lackey generation or synergy
• Schemes (eg Hagatha's Scheme or Togwaggle's Scheme)
• Reborn
• Plagues (eg Plague of Flames or Plague of Murlocs)
• Invoke
• Sidequests
• Breaths (eg Breath of Dreams or Corrosive Breath)
• Explorers (eg Azure Explorer or Bronze Explorer)
  • Note that to count as an Explorer, your card can only have a single keyword in addition to the Dragon-discovering Battlecry

Welcome back everyone! Man, it's good to see competitions return.

To celebrate coming back after so long away, we want to see cards all about what we went through in that time - the Year of the Dragon.

We've tested our new system quite a bit, but if you experience any issues with it, don't hesitate to get in touch with us on Discord, or by directly messaging me here on the site. We'd be foolish to think we'll get through it without a few bumps in the road, though hopefully we navigated through most of them over the weekend.

Competition Phases

Here are the phases of this card design competition

• Submission Phase: Starts on Mon, Feb 17 17:00 EST (GMT -0500). Runs until Sat, Feb 22 17:00 EST (GMT -0500)
• Voting Phase: Starts on Sat, Feb 22 17:00 EST (GMT -0500). Runs until Sun, Feb 23 16:00 EST (GMT -0500)
• Finalist Phase: Starts on Sun, Feb 23 17:00 EST (GMT -0500). Runs until Mon, Feb 24 17:00 EST (GMT -0500)
• Winner Selected: After finalist voting concludes and we validate votes.

Discussion Thread Rules

No thread rules were added to this season. Please populate and manually edit this thread with them.

How To Enter

Once you've decided upon your design, it's time to enter! You can find the main competition page by clicking the banner above.

There, you'll find a section entitled 'Submit Entry'. This will take you to a form to fill out with the details of your card, along with a place to upload an image of it - use Hearthcards to create a great looking image!

Make sure you check your entry over, because once you've submitted you won't be able to change it.

Under Description, is that where we put the literal card description? Or?

So glad to see the card design competitions are back!

Here is my card, there are probably a couple of kinks to work out, but this is the first thing I thought of.

Show Spoiler

When I am posting a card, what is a good size to make it so that it doesn't fill up the whole screen? Or is it a good size as it is?

Probably not a winning design, but I wanted to try my hand at making a better Dr. Boom's Scheme.  Obviously this is a much more playable card (because... anything would be more playable than the actual Scheme card), but it also has a flavor more in line with Dr Boom's personality.

Ehhh... think this should cost more?

The thing is if this could only target minions, then it's just Hagatha's scheme but a lot worse. I get that the design is a bit edgy, but I was trying to think of what hadn't been done yet with Schemes and what else could be, and face damage is what I came up with.

As for the watermark... I forgot to change it, and that it was even there. I haven't used a cardmaker in a while. :P

Decided to make a villainous sidequest, in this case Warlock healing that requires you to damage yourself first. Not sure how the power level is but thought it was an interesting concept.

I don't even think there's anything you really want to hit with Sylvanas's scheme in Standard right now. Unless I'm missing something?

I guess Kobold Sandtrooper and Leper Gnome are obvious hits, but...

Best of luck to everyone! And great job on the website design for the competitions! 

This is my first submission ever, so go easy on me!

Show Spoiler

Quote From Demonxz95

Quote From Xarkkal

Best of luck to everyone! And great job on the website design for the competitions! 

 

This is my first submission ever, so go easy on me!

 

Show Spoiler

 

Welcome aboard, Xarkkal. Always nice to see new faces in these competitions.

I voted 4 stars for your card. It's a beautiful, elegantly simple card that only loses a star because it seems a bit overpowered as a premium statted 4-drop with two pretty useful abilities.

Thanks for the warm welcome and feedback! I was feeling it was a little too overpowered. After submitting it, I started thinking that I should have made him a 4/3. But at the same time, 

First time entering one of those competitions.

Probably should’ve checked for balance BEFORE I submitted this, but thoughts?

Hey everyone, it's amazing that competitions are back and I can't wait for the big ones as well.

Here's my idea, any thoughts?

I'm new to card design. Here's my version of a Explorer for one of the E.V.I.L classes.  

Quote From anchorm4n

Another first time participant here :-) I'm really excited! Could someone please explain to me how to add images to this thread, though? What am I to enter into the "source" field?

Here's a link to my entry on imgur for the time being.

Arcane Genius

 

Edit: Since it's my first try, feedback would be really appreciated. Here are some of my thoughts about the card: I'm currently enjoying JambaJooze's Wild Aggro Quest Mage. That made me want to create a cheap Mage spell generator which obviously screams RENO!! in the Year of the Dragon narrative. "Genius" is a reference to Reno ;-) Twinspell further helps completing the quest, so that was my keyword. There was a cool piece of art with Reno holding the Gatling Gun, but I decided against it in favor of the scrolls because the generated spells are added to your hand and not cast. The hardest part was balancing the card. Arcane Intellect draws 2 for 3, but those are not random. So I went with Tome of Intellect for reference and extrapolated. The downside of the spells being random was heavy enough for me to not increase the cost of the card by 1 for the twinspell-tag, but that surely is debateable. In the end, this card heavily supports Open the Waygate, Raid the Sky Temple and Learn Draconic. It also gives Casino Mage one more toy for the early game.

Edit 2: Oh dear. I have never played Raid the Sky Temple and wasn't aware of the fact that I used its art for my card. Just randomly got it from an art site. I'll just show myself out.

I personally would have settled on 3 mana for this as it currently way outclasses Cabalist's Tome, which was actually played a bit. Your card is a better version of 4 mana add 4 mage spells to your hand, notably in a class which uses Sorcerer's Apprentice almost by default, which reduces it to 2 mana overall, and then reduces the cost of everything it generates too. Even without the apprentice 4 mana add 4 probably raises a few concerns.

If it was in another class I could see there being a case for making it 2 mana if you really want to push the card, especially if that class has a lot of situational or low value spells that might not be super helpful (e.g. Paladin), but in mage it feels too easy to abuse.

So I had two ideas and would love some feedback on which everyone thinks is better? I really wish the reborn mechanic had taken off more - I really liked it and the paladin quest...

can someone tell me how would i post an image into a comment

Quote From linkblade91

Quote From KANSAS

When I am posting a card, what is a good size to make it so that it doesn't fill up the whole screen? Or is it a good size as it is?

I prefer the size of Demon's card, which is 250x358 or something like that. 250 x (whatever) is a perfectly fine size.

As for commentary on the card, I'm not a fan of the two options being so off-kilter. Either you high-roll a well-statted Rush minion, or you pay 4 mana for a vanilla 3/3. If you're relying on randomness to rein in the card's balance, the two options should at least be equivalent in power.

Thanks for the feedback!

I was not all too confident on making it so RNG reliant. But my thought was that sense it is a twinspell you would be more likely to high roll and it would soften the blow of the randomness. But since this is a card you would want to play on curve, it would feel pretty bad to low roll on turn 4, even if you did then highroll on turn 5.

Does this look better?

Also, thank you for the dimensions.

@Demonxz95 the wording is meant to imply that’ you pass two turns without attacking while you could’ve 

Quote From linkblade91

These are the two cards I've made so far; the Scheme existed already from a similar theme in the past:

I think the Priest could have badly used more Lackey synergy to make it viable, while Sylvanas' Scheme might be too late to help Deathrattle Hunter make a comeback, but damn if it isn't gonna try.

The Sylvanas scheme is super broken. Just imagine triggering Boom Bot deathrattle 10-15 times.

Something weird for Hunter...

Quote From Demonxz95

Quote From linkblade91

These are the two cards I've made so far; the Scheme existed already from a similar theme in the past:

I think the Priest could have badly used more Lackey synergy to make it viable, while Sylvanas' Scheme might be too late to help Deathrattle Hunter make a comeback, but damn if it isn't gonna try.

To repeat what I said on Discord, I love Forsaken Harbinger. Sylvanas' Scheme might be a bit scary, although Hunters usually like to play fast and not hold their cards very long, so that might balance it.

No, the scheme is superbroken, for 6 mana you can Bomb Toss for 2 damage face and then Scheme the created Goblin Bomb for 10-30 face damage. This card would create the Expdia Hunter decks

Quote From anchorm4n

Thank you, that's great feedback. I honestly haven't thought about Cabalist's Tome. So two lessons learned already with my first entry: be sure the art isn't already in use and doublecheck for similar cards in the game.

What do you think about the rarity? The tome being an epic makes me feel like I got that aspect wrong, too... 

I think common is OK for it. Cabalist's Tome was in WotOG, and lots of things that were fancy back then are commonplace now. A good example is Princess Huhuran which got 'copied' by a rare only 1 year later with Terrorscale Stalker. These days adding mage spells to your hand is pretty standard.

I suppose you could compare to Pick Pocket which actually has a lot of similarities by having a set keyword, adding random cards to your hand and being repeatable. If that was a rare then perhaps your card could be too, but there is no need to go up to epic that's for sure.

Quote From JFK

Show Spoiler

Show Spoiler

Something weird for Hunter...

That's pretty interesting. I owuld say 2 things: 1) maybe lower the dmg and given the Corgen Rush? It would seem like more a control tool so rush would be key to playability + it wouldn't really "matter" how much dmg was done if the other minion became a 3/3 afterwards. 2) Having the "any minion damaged..." text on the spell is redundant since it's also on the token. 

Quote From Demonxz95

Quote From Alfi

Show Spoiler

Quote From Demonxz95

Quote From linkblade91

These are the two cards I've made so far; the Scheme existed already from a similar theme in the past:

Show Spoiler

Show Spoiler

I think the Priest could have badly used more Lackey synergy to make it viable, while Sylvanas' Scheme might be too late to help Deathrattle Hunter make a comeback, but damn if it isn't gonna try.

To repeat what I said on Discord, I love Forsaken Harbinger. Sylvanas' Scheme might be a bit scary, although Hunters usually like to play fast and not hold their cards very long, so that might balance it.

No, the scheme is superbroken, for 6 mana you can Bomb Toss for 2 damage face and then Scheme the created Goblin Bomb for 10-30 face damage. This card would create the Expdia Hunter decks

Most Hunter decks typically don't hold their cards for very long unless they need to.

Presumably "instant OTK" would qualify as a "need to" condition? We've seen time and again cards that got zero play until someone worked out a win condition - particularity on OTK - and then built an entire deck around them (why hello there Holy Wrath!). So to suggest that card wouldn't get held for 5-6 turns if it meant instant, nearly uncounterable face dmg for the guaranteed win is pretty hard to swallow.

If you really wanted to make that kind of card, I would tweak to say "trigger ONE random friendly minion's deathrattle" and then upgrades the number of minions it hit. it would obvious be capped at seven so yes it would follow Blizz's Consistently Inconsistent mantra, but otherwise it would be impossible to play around as an opponent. That or make it 10 mana so you would be unable to play it the same turn as the triggering minion/spell so at least the playaround is to clear the deathrattle minion(s)

heres my custom card ik it doesn't look good considering it was made in photoshop in about 5 minutes  i took some inspiration by warlocks corrution mechanic and Chaos Gazer for this card feel free to critique me if the card seem too op anyways have fun

if it doesn't show the card let me know

@Demonxz95 Thanks for the feedback. I agree that temporary health buffs are not the best design, with my card I wanted you to be able to build a board with lackeys, not just utilize their effect. Here's the changed version: (I also consider +2 attack instead of +1/+1.)

Glad it's back. I won't put as much time as before into WCDCs though.

Here's what I'm going with:

Heal Druid was vaguely an archetype during RoS but it didn't take hold.

Quote From DescentOfDragonsOp

heres my custom card ik it doesn't look good considering it was made in photoshop in about 5 minutes  i took some inspiration by warlocks corrution mechanic and Chaos Gazer for this card feel free to critique me if the card seem too op anyways have fun

if it doesn't show the card let me know

Use this site to make your card http://www.hearthcards.net/ 

Quote From Cheese

Glad it's back. I won't put as much time as before into WCDCs though.

Here's what I'm going with:

Heal Druid was vaguely an archetype during RoS but it didn't take hold.

What's Triple Twinspell

Quote From JFK

Something weird for Hunter...

Flux,

Is there a way for people to submit tokens with their entries? It would be nice, for example, to be able to see JFK's Corgen token when voting on Plague of Fetching. Just a thought. 

Quote From Cheese

Glad it's back. I won't put as much time as before into WCDCs though.

Here's what I'm going with:

Heal Druid was vaguely an archetype during RoS but it didn't take hold.

just in case you didn't know, a twin spell card with multiple twin spells on it gives you copies with multiple twin spells, just like in the dungeon runs. so if you were to play this card once, you would get three of them but with two twin spells. I feel like this might be too strong in combination with auctioneer

edit: I forgot how the interaction worked, my bad.

i would but im on my school laptop and they blocked that site

Yes, that's what I'm going for. It's a spell you can cast 4 times.

For some reason quoting your post Xarkkal isn't working, I'll need to get that looked into.

Anyway, currently the system for tokens involves submitting an additional card, which you would submit as a token. Obviously this isn't ideal, as for example this current competition only lets you submit one card.

In the short term, I'll make sure we include space for an additional token card to be submitted (when tokens are allowed by a theme). In the long term, we'll look at coming up with a better system for including tokens - Hero Cards, for example, are particularly obnoxious to submit right now.

Couldn't you simply post the token in the "description" box?

Is this okay for a scheme-card? Not balance wise (although I'd also appreciate feedback) but per defintion of scheme.

i like this alot however 2 things 1 statemnt and 1 question

this needs to be played soon or else youll burn cards and fatige is also a factor that you need to consider if you play this late game

2.does the scheme upgrade even when its on board or does it stop when you play it

@Elfensilver:

I like the idea of having a 'scheme' minion. But I don't think drawing cards is the kind of thing you want on a scheme. After 10 cards it is just plain bad, and before that it is just too powerful. I like the idea, but not this specific effect. Also, does it continue to upgrade after hitting the field?

@ShadowOfSense, I also cannot quote Elfensilver. This is definitely something you should look into. 

Quote From DescentOfDragonsOp

2.does the scheme upgrade even when its on board or does it stop when you play it

I do not know yet, depends what will be valid as a scheme in this competition. It will probably be either or, not both. Both would make this unplayable, since making you overdraw would be way to easy.

Since the scheming not to overdraw while you have the card in hand is interesting,  but it may very well be OP, if you get it early on - turn 1 or 2, you can then play it on curve to get 2 or 3 cards - arcane intellect with a body.  Looks a tad too strong this way.

If it only upgrades while on board, it's about the strength of an Acolyte of Pain, but may get stronger. In control/OTK matches, an opponent may even chose to not clear it immediatly, for you to overdraw.  This is the option I would prefer.

I think having the minion only upgrade when it is on the field does certainly make it more interesting, but it also makes it a lot worse unless you give it stealth or something. Most of the time in Hearthstone, if your opponent wants something dead it will be dead within 2 turns. Also, schemes, by their very nature, upgrade while in your hand. So having it only upgrade while on the field doesn't really make it a scheme. But if you did want to make it only upgrade on the field, an interesting thing you could do would be to give it an upside and a downside so that your opponent will be tempted to let you have it for a little while. For example, if the card said "draw 1 and remove 1 card from the top of your deck" then your opponent will have a reason to leave it on the field. But all the same, I think that it should only upgrade while in hand.

Quote From KANSAS

…But all the same, I think that it should only upgrade while in hand.

Thank you, that is a sensitive answer. I'll scrap this design, since it obviously isn't clear enough yet. I do like the general idea, but as it is, it's impossible to balance.

Aight, first competition of OoC here we come! Dang I missed participating in competitions, but may just occasionally participate tho.

I made a thought-out potpourri of cards to see what sticks and to see what you guys thought about them and i still suck at making spells, btw, I am still lacking in the creative apartment.

I'm redesigning some of the more underwhelming cards this year:

This is my first time. So wish me luck.

EDIT : Final card added. Thanks for insight and critics.

@Shatterstar: I really like the cards! I think plague of madness is the better of the two (mainly because plague of madness is way worse than breath of time, and so it needed the buff more). But one little nitpick, it should say "for each card you have played this turn" instead of "for each cards you played this turn". Also, to keep it in line with the other plagues, it should hit every minion, not just enemy ones. I would also reduce it to 3-4 mana to compensate for it hitting your own minions.

@H0lysatan: I don't like it. It is either a (almost) guaranteed win against half of your opponents, or just straight up horrible against the other half. It is not interactive and it is not fun. Being able to interact with the opponent's quest is an interesting idea, but it should not be as brutal as this.

Quote From KANSAS

@H0lysatan: I don't like it. It is either a (almost) guaranteed win against half of your opponents, or just straight up horrible against the other half. It is not interactive and it is not fun. Being able to interact with the opponent's quest is an interesting idea, but it should not be as brutal as this.

If Blizzard can create a tech card like Platebreaker & Living Dragonbreath, I think card like this needs to be there too. If quest is meta, then this will see play, if quest is not meta, then this won't see play.

Quote From linkblade91

To start off, the Golem has no connection to a Year of the Dragon mechanic, meaning it would be disqualified for sure. Your second card is also problematic because it has five lines of text: Hearthstone convention says that all cards max out at four lines of text, both for the sake of readability and because it's the maximum level of complexity Team 5 is willing to go forward with. If you cut out the damage part and just make it focused on the guessing part (and balance appropriately), it would be much better (despite not following the prompt; save it for later!).

I'm not sure how you put Golem has no connection to Year of Dragon, I'm pretty sure I tried creating cards based on Uldum and that is part of the Year of Dragons.

Quote From <a href=

Your first card is technically fine, but I would have a huge problem with it existing in-game. Quests (especially the main Quests) completely influence how a deck is built, and making a card that can destroy the Quest torpedoes their entire game-plan in one fell swoop. It's either useless because your opponent isn't running a Quest, or it's game-ruining if they are. I think something better would be an "aura" effect that says "Players cannot progress with their Quests" or something like that. Like Mindbreaker, but for Quests instead of Hero Powers. That could give you the anti-Quest power you're looking for, but without the kill-shot power of its current iteration. As KANSAS put it, it's just too "brutal" right now.

And about this. That's the whole idea of this minion. Even without quest, the rest of the deck is still working. The same reactions I've read when Platebreaker is printed. "OMG. so broken", "LOL, goodbye Warrior class" and so on. So, I won't back out with this card no matter what.

EDIT. forgot to write, that you can't please everyone out. So vote what you like, and move on I guess.

Quote From linkblade91

Quote From h0lysatan

Quote From linkblade91

To start off, the Golem has no connection to a Year of the Dragon mechanic, meaning it would be disqualified for sure. Your second card is also problematic because it has five lines of text: Hearthstone convention says that all cards max out at four lines of text, both for the sake of readability and because it's the maximum level of complexity Team 5 is willing to go forward with. If you cut out the damage part and just make it focused on the guessing part (and balance appropriately), it would be much better (despite not following the prompt; save it for later!).

I'm not sure how you put Golem has no connection to Year of Dragon, I'm pretty sure I tried creating cards based on Uldum and that is part of the Year of Dragons.

Right, but we're looking for cards that work with/utilize the keywords or mechanics introduced in the Year of the Dragon. Twinspell, Plagues, Reborn, Sidequests, etc. Unless I'm mistaken, the Golem is just a minion that happens to be from the Year of the Dragon.

For the Sphinx, you can take or leave our advice however you want. Just trying to help :/

Alright then, golem will be revised. I love uldum so much I tried to create sand golem, but fine. I'll refer to this thread rules.

Thoughts on this one?

This is a spin on the classic "2 mana deal 3 damage". Being limited to this turn only makes it a bit less powerful but the Twinspell gives it more value. Maybe this will make Even mage good? (Lol no)

Yes, Boom Bot doesn't need to be bold, but as for the watermark... it doesn't have to be RoS.  I almost used RoS, but instead I imaginged it as being a card put into the Galakrond's Awakening after Team5 had time to see just how colossal of a failure that was Dr. Boom's Scheme.  I think it may have been the one scheme that never really found a home in at least one deck.

That's not true... Lazul's Scheme was also pretty horrible and never really played.  Maybe even played less than Boom's.

Thoughts? I wanted something representing the Wyrmrest accord.

But I'm not sure yetwhether the Sidequest fits into Druid. Yes, Alexstrasza, Queen of the Accord is most probably a druid, but spell generation isn't really a thing for druid. Mechanically, Rogue or Mage would be a better fit.

And another question: How many entries can one person submit?

Quote From DestroyerR

Probably should’ve checked for balance BEFORE I submitted this, but thoughts?

Such card is tricky to evaluate.. how many turns do you really not attack? (it includes weapons) even in shirvallah OTK you want to attack to defend yourself.. maybe lower to draw 2 it's good enough at that.

Quote From Orrien

Hey everyone, it's amazing that competitions are back and I can't wait for the big ones as well.

Here's my idea, any thoughts?

I think this card is overloaded with effects.. should either be a legendary or a class card (suggestion: warlock)

@DoubleSummon you started explaining why the card is UP, then suggested to nerf it?

Card comps are back! Yay! What do you guys think of my submission?

in my opinion this seems op because all you need is to keep it alive for 4 turns and boom its fully invoked galakrond and other cards like Plot Twist and other big draw cards to skyrocket graggle 

but other than that its a unique card design

@Sinti i appreciate the feedback but im on my school computer while doing this and my school computer blocked the hearthcards website

BUG? I just tried to submit my entry and got the message "You're lost - we're not in the submission phase yet". Am I missing something it looks like the timer says the submission phase is open?

Here's my entry, I was expecting something Neutral like this in Awakening. So..

Quote From Fluxflashor

Quote From ArngrimUndying

BUG? I just tried to submit my entry and got the message "You're lost - we're not in the submission phase yet". Am I missing something it looks like the timer says the submission phase is open?

When visiting the submission page or when actually hitting the Submit Entry button?

What page URL were you on?

Hitting the submit entry button on https://outof.cards/hearthstone/fan-creations/competitions/1-how-to-train-year-dragon/submit-entry/

ETA I just tried again and it went through - only difference is that when it didn't go through I had written a good bit in the "description" field about how i thought you could play the card. this time I only wrote one line of flavor text. Not sure maybe there's a hidden character limit on the description box?

When voting, can we see how many are left to vote on?

Quote From Rippy

Here's my entry, I was expecting something Neutral like this in Awakening. So..

It is an interesting card, but I don't like it very much because the EVIL classes aren't supposed to have highlander stuff, so having a highlander card that can be used exclusively by the league of EVIL doesn't seem fair. Also, invoking three times is pretty nuts. Just this card by itself almost gives you a fully invoked galakrond.

Quote From Cheese

Quote From Demonxz95

Quote From Xarkkal

Quote From Cheese

Glad it's back. I won't put as much time as before into WCDCs though.

Here's what I'm going with:

Heal Druid was vaguely an archetype during RoS but it didn't take hold.

What's Triple Twinspell

It appears on THE… Candles? An adventure treasure.

Each use consumes 1 Twinspell, so it would go down to 2 Twinspells, then 1, then 0.

Yes, that's what I'm going for. It's a spell you can cast 4 times.

Got it! I never ran into [Hearthstone Card (THE… Candles?) Not Found] in my dungeon runs, so triple twinspell was a new idea to me. 

Quote From ShadowsOfSense

For some reason quoting your post Xarkkal isn't working, I'll need to get that looked into.

Anyway, currently the system for tokens involves submitting an additional card, which you would submit as a token. Obviously this isn't ideal, as for example this current competition only lets you submit one card.

In the short term, I'll make sure we include space for an additional token card to be submitted (when tokens are allowed by a theme). In the long term, we'll look at coming up with a better system for including tokens - Hero Cards, for example, are particularly obnoxious to submit right now.

You shall not quote me!

I'm excited to see future developments on this system. Already out the gate, this is the best organized card competition on the internet. I know with user feedback, it's only going to get better. You guys did a great job with all of this! Looking forward to all the competitions!

Quote From thepowrofcheese

Card comps are back! Yay! What do you guys think of my submission?

I really like it, seems balanced.

Quote From BasilAnguis

This is a spin on the classic "2 mana deal 3 damage". Being limited to this turn only makes it a bit less powerful but the Twinspell gives it more value. Maybe this will make Even mage good? (Lol no)

I like the flavor and the idea. My only concern, is the fact that at 2 mana, you are able to play all 4 of these, with the HP on turn 10. That's a 13 damage HP for 10 mana. I personally would feel a bit more comfortable with this at 3 mana to help prevent any OTK shenanigans. But, that's just my personal opinion, and it's probably perfectly fine at 2 mana. 

Quote From BasilAnguis

This is a spin on the classic "2 mana deal 3 damage". Being limited to this turn only makes it a bit less powerful but the Twinspell gives it more value. Maybe this will make Even mage good? (Lol no)

I agree with Xarkkal that this can get a bit out of hand. One change you could make would be to make it say "Your next hero power deals 4 damage this turn" so that they can't stack.

Quote From Xarkkal

Quote From BasilAnguis

This is a spin on the classic "2 mana deal 3 damage". Being limited to this turn only makes it a bit less powerful but the Twinspell gives it more value. Maybe this will make Even mage good? (Lol no)

I like the flavor and the idea. My only concern, is the fact that at 2 mana, you are able to play all 4 of these, with the HP on turn 10. That's a 13 damage HP for 10 mana. I personally would feel a bit more comfortable with this at 3 mana to help prevent any OTK shenanigans. But, that's just my personal opinion, and it's probably perfectly fine at 2 mana. 

For a dissenting opinion here - I don't think that's all that bad given the draw/holding requirements to pull it off. Put another way: you can do 15 face dmg for 10 mana with double Fireball + a Frostbolt - that requires you to draw/hold 3 separate cards vs only 2 here, but is also 3 more dmg so I think the tradeoff is fair.

Quote From ArngrimUndying

Quote From Xarkkal

Quote From BasilAnguis

This is a spin on the classic "2 mana deal 3 damage". Being limited to this turn only makes it a bit less powerful but the Twinspell gives it more value. Maybe this will make Even mage good? (Lol no)

I like the flavor and the idea. My only concern, is the fact that at 2 mana, you are able to play all 4 of these, with the HP on turn 10. That's a 13 damage HP for 10 mana. I personally would feel a bit more comfortable with this at 3 mana to help prevent any OTK shenanigans. But, that's just my personal opinion, and it's probably perfectly fine at 2 mana. 

For a dissenting opinion here - I don't think that's all that bad given the draw/holding requirements to pull it off. Put another way: you can do 15 face dmg for 10 mana with double Fireball + a Frostbolt - that requires you to draw/hold 3 separate cards vs only 2 here, but is also 3 more dmg so I think the tradeoff is fair.

Very good point. I'm probably biased by my mage hate hah

Hi everyone, just giving a quick update on the competition.

We've had a good number of entries so far, which is great to see. I'm loving what I'm seeing from some of these entries, and personally I'm really enjoying the new voting system - a lot of entries I wouldn't have upvoted before are getting 3s or even 4s from me, which feels far more fair to them.

We've also had a few people (I won't name any names) who submitted entries with only an image of the art they would have used for their card, instead of an image of the card itself. I totally get why they made that mistake - I did the same myself during testing - and since it's the first run of the new system, I've offered to change their entries for them if they provide me with a card image. So don't be surprised if you check your votes and see some cards in place of art pieces sometime later in the week!

Overall, glad you're all enjoying the new system! We've already talked a bunch about where we'd like to go with improvements. No ETA on anything, but ideas have been floated.

Quote From ArngrimUndying

Quote From Xarkkal

Quote From BasilAnguis

This is a spin on the classic "2 mana deal 3 damage". Being limited to this turn only makes it a bit less powerful but the Twinspell gives it more value. Maybe this will make Even mage good? (Lol no)

I like the flavor and the idea. My only concern, is the fact that at 2 mana, you are able to play all 4 of these, with the HP on turn 10. That's a 13 damage HP for 10 mana. I personally would feel a bit more comfortable with this at 3 mana to help prevent any OTK shenanigans. But, that's just my personal opinion, and it's probably perfectly fine at 2 mana. 

For a dissenting opinion here - I don't think that's all that bad given the draw/holding requirements to pull it off. Put another way: you can do 15 face dmg for 10 mana with double Fireball + a Frostbolt - that requires you to draw/hold 3 separate cards vs only 2 here, but is also 3 more dmg so I think the tradeoff is fair.

Two fireballs are enough. That's 12 damage for 8 mana, for 2 cards, plus a hero power for the remaining 2 mana is exactly the same thing as 4 casts of Fire Within. 

Quote From BasilAnguis

Quote From ArngrimUndying

Quote From Xarkkal

Quote From BasilAnguis

This is a spin on the classic "2 mana deal 3 damage". Being limited to this turn only makes it a bit less powerful but the Twinspell gives it more value. Maybe this will make Even mage good? (Lol no)

I like the flavor and the idea. My only concern, is the fact that at 2 mana, you are able to play all 4 of these, with the HP on turn 10. That's a 13 damage HP for 10 mana. I personally would feel a bit more comfortable with this at 3 mana to help prevent any OTK shenanigans. But, that's just my personal opinion, and it's probably perfectly fine at 2 mana. 

For a dissenting opinion here - I don't think that's all that bad given the draw/holding requirements to pull it off. Put another way: you can do 15 face dmg for 10 mana with double Fireball + a Frostbolt - that requires you to draw/hold 3 separate cards vs only 2 here, but is also 3 more dmg so I think the tradeoff is fair.

Two fireballs are enough. That's 12 damage for 8 mana, for 2 cards, plus a hero power for the remaining 2 mana is exactly the same thing as 4 casts of Fire Within. 

This is true. So basically, this is just another fireball and more burn damage for mage when they already have so much burn damage.

This is not broken because it is too much damage for it's cost, but I wouldn't like to see this card printed because there is already so many ways for mage to deal burn damage and this would just make aggro mages way more consistnet.

Quote From KANSAS

Quote From BasilAnguis

Quote From ArngrimUndying

Quote From Xarkkal

Quote From BasilAnguis

This is true. So basically, this is just another fireball and more burn damage for mage when they already have so much burn damage.

This is not broken because it is too much damage for it's cost, but I wouldn't like to see this card printed because there is already so many ways for mage to deal burn damage and this would just make aggro mages way more consistnet.

Not really. The kink of the card is it forces you to pay 2 mana more to use it (hero power). At best you gotta spend 4 mana to deal 4 damage. This is only dangerous if you keep it in hand for a huge bursts late game with 2 copies of it, and aggro mage doesn't like holding cards in hand till 10 mana.

Quote From Nirast

In life, he was raised by Crystalsmith Kangor, who taught him the concepts of infinity and endlessness.

First idea, what do you think? If anyone is still in need of assistance, let me know.

Interesting idea, but I have two suggestions

1. The Reborn keyword is usually associated with mummies rather than just undead (there are exceptions though), so you might want to find some different art

2. Instead of calling it "a silenced copy of this minion", you should just have it say "a 4/7 dragon".

Honestly, I think the Immortal Bone Drake is super awesome as it is right now. Great flavour and really neat ability. I am not sure about everyone else but I would give this card 5 stars.

Quote From Nirast

In life, he was raised by Crystalsmith Kangor, who taught him the concepts of infinity and endlessness.

First idea, what do you think? If anyone is still in need of assistance, let me know.

This card frightens me. Now I haven’t played HS much lately so maybe I’m out of practice with balance, but this card looks insane. 6 Mana 4/7 Taunt Reborn is good. But it also generates 2 tokens, each of which can be bounced to generate more of the original card. It’s an expensive card but it can grind a game to a halt with just a few triggers or bounces

Been wanting some anti-Lackey tech since Zetalot mentioned them as a reason for his departure, and I agreed with it as a problem in the current meta (rogues and wild shaman). Let me know what you think.

FYI -- Lackeys still provide a dragon/spell/whatever, the players just can't choose anymore because of the loss of Discover if that is chosen. Art chosen was "rat dragon" -- I originally thought Dirty Rat clone, but that would be more ideal to get rid of Lackey generators than Lackeys, and not all Lackey generators are minions. The only ways I could think to hurt Lackeys fairly would be to silence them in hand, force them out (both of which wouldn't be effective as they're not commonly held long, if at all), remove Discover or increase the mana cost. Went with the latter two.

The only bit I was conflicted on was poisonous; I added as a "after year of the dragon/against non-lackey decks/late game" option, but I figure it counters stuff like Inner Fire priest well early too. Also gives it a slight upside/downside if you get this as your random dragon reward from Descent's Ysera or Alex.

PS -- My other idea was a 3-mana battlecry legendary, Lackey Union Leader,  that gradually increases the mana cost of Lackey +1 after the legendary is played.

Quote From thepowrofcheese

Quote From Nirast

In life, he was raised by Crystalsmith Kangor, who taught him the concepts of infinity and endlessness.

First idea, what do you think? If anyone is still in need of assistance, let me know.

This card frightens me. Now I haven’t played HS much lately so maybe I’m out of practice with balance, but this card looks insane. 6 Mana 4/7 Taunt Reborn is good. But it also generates 2 tokens, each of which can be bounced to generate more of the original card. It’s an expensive card but it can grind a game to a halt with just a few triggers or bounces

You make a very good point. Rogue could really abuse the tokens generated off of this, not to mention all the rogue deathrattle trigger effects. This card alone would create a new archetype... "Wall Rogue"

I would totally give this card 5 stars as is!

Quote From Nirast

Updated the card based on some feedback. The first time you play this, it costs 7, and the copies it gives you are 5 mana 4/7s.

Too clunky. You do not really understand the effect without an addendum.

Maybe lower the stats a bit, and drop the costs 2 more. Instead of 'add a silenced copy of this minion to your hand' maybe write:'add a mortal bone drake to to your hand. '

Or just make the original version a class card: Both archeologist-dinorider-Brann and Swamp witch Hagatha could very well have one of these. Class Cards are stronger. 

Quote From Nirast

How about this:

2. That's not exactly the same. If bounce back and replay or resurrect the copy from hand, it'd have the text.

Minions can't remain silenced while in hand. If you use Spellbreaker on a Bone Drake and Sap it, the card will still have the deathrattle. Under the current mechanics of the game, your card wouldn't work the way you intend it to.

this is my boi (edited because the watermark)

2nd edit: Thanks for the feedback. i already change the art ( from Learn Draconic ) for a new one that i recently found and i added "... to your hand". Right, that's a really important detail. 

Quote From mantiax

this is my boi (edited because the watermark)

It just says "add a random mage spell", I guess you meant "add a random mage spell to your hand". You should probably fix that before submitting the card. Other than that, it looks good!

Already submitted this, but I would still be interested in some feedback for future competitions.

Quote From mantiax

this is my boi (edited because the watermark)

The only problem I see with this card it that after holding it for 2 turns it already powercreeps Cabalist's Tome. Also it uses art of an already existing card, so you may want to change it.

Quote From Demonxz95

Quote From CableKnight

Already submitted this, but I would still be interested in some feedback for future competitions.

It doesn't really make a lot of sense for a Scheme card to use a watermark from a set before it existed, but the card is otherwise fine

I agree that the watermark decision was questionable. I understand why you chose it, but since this is a year of the dragon competition, I would suggest any of the 4 YoD watermarks instead. 

Otherwise, I love the flavor of the card and the effect. It's Moorabi's effect, but actually playable!

Quote From Nirast

Show Spoiler

Quote From CableKnight

Quote From Nirast

How about this:

2. That's not exactly the same. If bounce back and replay or resurrect the copy from hand, it'd have the text.

Minions can't remain silenced while in hand. If you use Spellbreaker on a Bone Drake and Sap it, the card will still have the deathrattle. Under the current mechanics of the game, your card wouldn't work the way you intend it to.

We also didn't use to have minions with buff in the hand, yet here we are

Handbuffs are the exception, not the rule. 

Quote From Nirast

Quote From CableKnight

Quote From Nirast

How about this:

2. That's not exactly the same. If bounce back and replay or resurrect the copy from hand, it'd have the text.

Minions can't remain silenced while in hand. If you use Spellbreaker on a Bone Drake and Sap it, the card will still have the deathrattle. Under the current mechanics of the game, your card wouldn't work the way you intend it to.

We also didn't use to have minions with buff in the hand, yet here we are

Quote From Author

Quoted Text

We all try to justify adding new mechanics or twist existing ones when we design new cards. If you can pull it off, great. But creating silenced copies of your taunt dragon in your hand isn’t a neat effect. It’s overly complicated, messy, and causes many weird theoretical plays with bouncing and other effects. Are there any single cards in game now that are this convoluted? Would the game benefit from such an addition

Imo, scrap the silenced hand copy. It’s too complicated on an already very wordy card that’s probably OP.

We all try to justify new mechanics of twisting existing ones when we create new cards. But remember how Hearthstone is intended to be: simple. Easy to understand. Quick to pick up. Most cards and effects are self explanatory.

Now look at the dragon. Big taunt, reborn, every time it dies you get a silenced copy of it in your hand. That silenced copy can, with other effects, become a normal copy. Is there any card in the game now that’s anywhere near this convoluted?

New voting system is interesting... I'm not used to the 5 star rating system. I'm glad I could go back and change ratings. I handed out some 1 and 2s that in retrospect, were decent compared to some really bad or non-sensical entries.

I kinda prefer being able to see all cards at once. It's hard to judge cards in a vacuum, easier to compare good and bad cards. Not sure the 5 stars are needed either. I'd go for a 3 rating system, bad, middle of the road, great. 

Quote From Nirast

Ok, so my last card proved quite... divisive, so I'm putting it on the back burner and replacing it with an idea I've had since RoS launched:

The transformations go liike this:

Ethereal Lackey - Arch-Villain Rafaam

Witchy Lackey - Swampqueen Hagatha

Goblin Lackey - Blastmaster Boom

Faceless Lackey - Madame Lazul

Kobold Lackey - Heistbaron Togwaggle

You don't get anything for the Colosal Lackey and Dragon Lackey, since that would be too convoluted.

I'm not sure about the name and stats.

This is very expensive, even for its effect (literally 7 mana 2/4 do nothing). Also, random bosses are not that great (especially Blastmaster Boom or Rafaam) plus if you end up with multiple dragon/colosal lackeys this card becomes useless. 

Quote From Nirast

Quote From Orrien

Quote From Nirast

Ok, so my last card proved quite... divisive, so I'm putting it on the back burner and replacing it with an idea I've had since RoS launched:

The transformations go liike this:

Ethereal Lackey - Arch-Villain Rafaam

Witchy Lackey - Swampqueen Hagatha

Goblin Lackey - Blastmaster Boom

Faceless Lackey - Madame Lazul

Kobold Lackey - Heistbaron Togwaggle

You don't get anything for the Colosal Lackey and Dragon Lackey, since that would be too convoluted.

I'm not sure about the name and stats.

This is very expensive, even for its effect (literally 7 mana 2/4 do nothing). Also, random bosses are not that great (especially Blastmaster Boom or Rafaam) plus if you end up with multiple dragon/colosal lackeys this card becomes useless. 

It replaces the Lackeys on board, not in hand

Ah sorry for misunderstanding. In that case this card looks fine I guess. It becomes scary when you set it up with ethereal/goblin lackeys on turn 10 but that requires some rng so I guess it's fine.

Quote From Nirast

Quote From linkblade91

Quote From Nirast

Ok, so my last card proved quite... divisive, so I'm putting it on the back burner and replacing it with an idea I've had since RoS launched:

...

You don't get anything for the Colosal Lackey and Dragon Lackey, since that would be too convoluted.

I think the idea is neat overall, but would argue that separating the Lackeys is what makes this convoluted. I don't like dividing an already-small set (Lackeys) into two smaller subsets (the "originals" vs the new ones). You have to spell out that only the Rise of Shadows Lackeys count, which tells me that the card is trying too hard to be functional.

Ok, but then who would be the bosses for the other two Lackeys? Colossus of the Moon and Dragonqueen Alextraza? That would pretty much make it busted.

That's his point; the idea doesn't work given the fact that are two lackeys that don't come from ROS

Here is my entry. Never done a card comp before

(Darn it no space between : and complete. Just pretend there is)

Quote From SamHobbs494

Here is my entry. Never done a card comp before

(Darn it no space between : and complete. Just pretend there is)

Welcome to your first competition!

I like the art, and the cost. (but it's an OP card) But reborn at full health is just not reborn anymore. With a normal reborn- or coming back at full health, the card would still fit the theme of the competition. 

Quote From Elfensilver

Quote From SamHobbs494

Here is my entry. Never done a card comp before

(Darn it no space between : and complete. Just pretend there is)

Welcome to your first competition!

I like the art, and the cost. (but it's an OP card) But reborn at full health is just not reborn anymore. With a normal reborn- or coming back at full health, the card would still fit the theme of the competition. 

Cool thanks for the feedback. I do have a tendency to make named characters too op  lol

Quote From Demonxz95

• Mummy Momma - 3 stars - The art is pretty nice! The effect is balanced. But... when you use the Classic watermark on a card that has not 1, but 2 keywords not available in Classic, it's off-putting (to me at least, I know some people don't care about this as much). In addition to Reborn being mainly an Uldum mechanic, the art screams Uldum to me. Also, the name could be better but that's not as bad as the other criticism.

Thanks for the review! I actually feel pretty differently about this. I use the default classic watermark for most cards. Using the Uldum watermark doesn't make sense to me, since this is a custom card and will never be a part of that set. Still, I see your point. Maybe I'll start going with no watermarks.

Congrats to the Shivershine for winning!

Interesting to see how this turned out. All 8 finalists were very close in their final score. Only 0.3 separate 1st from 8th place! This does kinda make me wonder if this is the right scoring system to be using? I wasn't sure how scoring was being done, I voted for my own card and didn't vote for the other finalists in the final round. I guess it incentivizes me to give them all 1 star? That feels lame and I didn't want to do that. Might be a good call to not let finalists vote in the final round?

It is nice that later entries (like mine) were still able to compete and still received a good number of views and votes, which was a problem back on hearthpwn.

I don't know if any changes need to be made just yet. But I will say that I already like this better than the old system on Hearthpwn.

Quote From Nirast

This a better Pit Snake without the Lackey stuff. I'd make it cost 2. 

Choose One is exclusive to Druids, so you can't use it on a neutral card. I'd just give it a Battlecry: All Lackeys cost (1) more.

Yeah I should have picked Siamat's wording, which wouldn't offend those who like Druid's exclusive Choose One mechanic.
While increasing the mana cost for Lackeys does hurt, Discover makes the dragon and spell lackeys still powerful even at 2 or 3 mana. Turning Lackeys into say a 2 1/1 that may randomly award Fireball or Myra's Unstable Element makes the things weaker.
Too late for this contest, but new wording would be thus:

Battlecry: Lackeys cost 1 mana more or lose Discover ability this game (your choice).

And yeah, I'd increase it to 2 mana. Thanks.

Wow, first entry, first win. Thanks for voting for me!

Quote From Fluxflashor

Quote From ZardozSpeakz

 Although I'd personally like to wait and see how things turn out over multiple competitions before anything changes, we maybe could have done a better job at getting people to go and vote in the finals, even those that don't take part in the competitions themselves.

Anything that can improve the voting experience is A+.

As far as increasing outreach, the fan portal page is great, but I'd put card voting directly on that page, perhaps a sidebar widget of some sort. If someone makes it to that page, they'd immediately be enticed to vote on the card. You could put such a widget on the front page, or the hearthstone portal front page, but I understand if space on those pages is better dedicated to other content (decks, articles, other card games etc).