Hearthstone realm banner
Hearthstone realm avatar Hearthstone realm home

Hearthstone

142 Characters Joined
Create Thread
Hearthstone | Posted by | 6 years, 1 month ago
Fan Creations

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:

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.

154 Share

// join_the_conversation

Sign in to share your thoughts, vote on comments, and connect with the community.

Sign in Create account

Comments

Sort by:
Oldest Newest Top

  • 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:

    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.

    • First time entering one of those competitions.

  • I made this card in like, 1 minute, so it's likely broken. I say, it's a proof of concept.

    And I'm now noticing that "Battlecries" didn't bold by itself. Damn.

    Friendly Staff

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

    • Quote From griffior

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

      This could have been better communicated. It is a spot for you to leave an optional description for your entry. We don't have a spot for inputting the card text itself though that would be a good improvement.

  • 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?

    Friendly
    • 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.

      Friendly
      • 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.

        Usually, I actually use 200. Unless it's a Legendary spell, then I use 221.

        Friendly Staff
      • 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.

        Friendly

    • Sweet concept. I agree with Linkblade about the lack of equality in the 2 options. I'd say a 4/5 Taunt or a 5/4 Rush, maybe?

  • 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.

    • Quote From Thonson

      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.

      I can understand not using the same name as Dr. Boom's Scheme, although the naming still seems a bit off. It also would probably make more sense to use the RoS watermark when you're making a Scheme card, and I don't think Boom Bot needs to be bolded.

      Besides that though, this is a pretty nice card that definitely should've been what Dr. Boom's Scheme was. I quite like it.

      Friendly Staff

      • 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.

        • Quote From Thonson

          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.

          Lazul's Scheme actually did see a little bit of play. Granted, not much. I suppose you are right about the watermark. I suppose a scheme could've been in Galakrond's Awakening, although then it would make more sense to use the Galakrond's Awakening watermark.

          Friendly Staff

  • 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.

    Friendly
    • 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.

      Friendly Staff
      • 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 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:

          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.

          Friendly Staff
          • 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)

    • 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.

  • Ehhh... think this should cost more?

    • Quote From WailordKari

      Ehhh... think this should cost more?

      There is potential for this to be dangerous, although Hunter doesn't really like to hold its cards for very long unless it needs to.

      Probably also shouldn't use the Classic watermark if it's a Scheme card.

      Friendly Staff
    • Quote From WailordKari

      Ehhh... think this should cost more?

      It's going to take five turns to reach a Fireball level, but it's also in a class that would LOVE the reach. I'm not a fan of you "printing" such a card, because I think it's the wrong way for the Hunter to go, but taken at face value I guess it's okay as it is cost-wise. Maybe if it said "to a minion", it would be less scary.

      All of that being said, it should not have the Classic watermark.

      Friendly

  • 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 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.

      Friendly Staff
      • 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, 

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

    • 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)

  • 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?

    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.

    • 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.

      • 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... 

        • 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.

  • 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.  

    • OMG it's so freaking cute!

  • 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 DescentOfDragonsOp

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

      On the post interface, there should be an "Insert Edit/Image" button (located above "Runeterra Card Image). Click that.

      Paste the image URL into the "Source" box, and the dimensions should come up. Hearthstone cards by default start at 400, but most people use either 200 or 250 as their default sizes for cards.

      Friendly Staff
  • Show Spoiler
    Quote From steli2

    First time entering one of those competitions.

    Hey Steli! Welcome aboard.

    Your card seems fine as the reward is powerful, but the effect is slow. That said, it's basically 2 mana to do nothing until you draw it.

    Show Spoiler
    Quote From DestroyerR

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

    The main problem I see is that if you play it on turn 1, it's always going to end up completed at the end of turn 2 since you can't attack for those two turns anyway.

    Show Spoiler
    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.

    Other than the fact that it has used art (which you pointed art), I don't see anything wrong with the card.

    Show Spoiler
    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 can't wait for the big comps either. They're so exciting to me.

    In general, most people try to avoid passive Health buffs. If you've ever seen Stormwind Champion on the board, you'd see how its effect has some very "wonky" mechanics when it dies. I feel like the +1/+1 in exchange for 1 mana is also probably more bad than good since the good thing about Lackeys is that you can fit them n just about any turn you want.

    Show Spoiler
    Quote From Shivershine

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

    Simple, yet just good. I like cards like this.

    My only nitpick is that you made this card a Rare whereas all the existing Dragon Explorer cards are Common.

    Show Spoiler
    Quote From ArngrimUndying

    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…

                   

    What class are these supposed to be for? I assume Paladin since you mentioned it in your post.

    My favorite of the two is personally Multiplying Mummies, but either of them are fine.

    Show Spoiler
    Quote From KANSAS
    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.

    Seems perfectly balanced (as all things should be), although I don't really see a reason why the randomness needs to be there.

    Friendly Staff

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

  • Something weird for Hunter...

    • 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 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. 

      • 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.

        • 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!

  • 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

    • 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/ 

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

  • @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.)

    • Quote From Orrien

      @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.)

      Yep, this is much better

      Friendly Staff

  • 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 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 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 [Hearthstone Card (THE… Candles?) Not Found] An adventure treasure.

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

        Friendly Staff
        • 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.

          • 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 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.

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

    Friendly

  • Scheming ExcavatorIs 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

      • 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.

          Friendly

  • @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. 

     

    Friendly

  • …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.

    • Quote From LarryMoments


      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 would go with Heist Deviser. You can spin it as a combination of Galakrond and Tess Greymane/Bazaar Burglary decks; creating a new archetype is always a hit with people. Gill Subjugator and Codex Keeper are kind of boring, comparatively speaking, although I do like Codex Keeper as well.

      Friendly

  • Alright! We are back baby! Welcome new faces, and hello to the old ones :)

    I see some of you already submitted your cards, some of you are still working on them. To everyone, good luck!

    Here is some feedback:

    @Demon: Shivaleera - eh, at 4 i still the effect itself is pretty strong, maybe too strong in rogue. Could be interesting tho.

    @KANSAS: Dragon Riding Lessons - little too cost efficient, also YUCK for another minion generation for spell hunter. The idea is not bad on itself tho, fits hunter theme.

    KANSAS

    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.

     

    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?

    @Thonson: Boom's Bomb Scheme - This could be pretty strong, it was a pretty decent Treasure in the crawlers.

    Thonson

    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.

    @Linky: Forsaken Harbinger - LOVE IT! Perfect design <3

    @WailordKari: Brann's Scheme - i dont think at any mana cost, this would be healthy for the game. Also, Classic watermark!

    WailordKari

    @Hordaki: Dark Resurgance - ugh, any healing for WL at this point is just pain in the ass, esp in Wild, tho 15 heal is way too much, i think if it healed just the 8 hp back, it would already be ok.

    Hordaki

    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.

    @Xarkkal: Ivory Explorer - Extremely strong card, this should cost at least 5, maybe even 6. Decent design, just a bit unbalanced. Would be in any dragon deck and plenty of non dragon decks as well.

    Xarkkal

    @steli2: Grand Heist - great card, anti-tempo, high rng potential and high explosive value potential, feels like this could have easilly been a real card, good job :)

    steli2

    @DestroyerR: Public Image - eh, card draw for pally always makes me squeamish, but im not too sure how would this one play out, the condition can be impossible or too easy hehe.

    DestroyerR

    @anchorm4n: Hi there, you need to input a direct link to cards, so for your example it would be https://i.imgur.com/R6UPkTD.png. Design fits the mage class, but the cost is way too low for what it provides, should be 3 to account for twinspell, and even then for balance reasons it should be 4, but obviously that would be unplayable in real conditions, so 3 it is :)

    @Orrien: EVIL Enchanter - interesting card, im not sure how popular would it be, given the low cost of lackeys is one of their strengths, tho i guess not being ping-able could make things more difficult for the opponent.

    Orrien

    @Shivershine: Cavern Explorer - pretty clean design. Very good for a newcomer, good job ;-)

    Shivershine

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

    @ArngrimUndying: Dead God's Gift - i like this one better, the other one is a bit too combo-y for my taste.

    ArngrimUndying

    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…

                 

    @JFK: Plague of Fetching - cute card, i have no idea how would it actually work in reality, would it be too strong or not? Possibly? Kinda like Plague of murlocs that keeps on giving, but it is a bit different in hunter. Hard to say.

    JFK

    Something weird for Hunter…

    @DescentOfDragonsOp: hi there, hope you will be able to make use of hearthcards.net next time, it really is a great tool for making custom cards and the appearance does matter in these comps, ppl tend to vote low on badly executed cards :( Not sure if the card isnt too weak honestly, tho i dont like hand attacks myself, i think it could cost 4 or even 3 mana.

    @Cheese: Rejuvenation - i actually LOVE the formating, it makes it feel like you're spamming heal, which you essentially are :D cute card!

    @Elfensilver: Scheming Excavator - i think schemes being spells is for a reason, your card would probably technically keep stacking even when on the board, i guess we could assume it wouldnt, but it still feels a bit weird. About balance, i actually think the card is kinda horrible, pretty much Octosari kind of bad, might be stuck in your hand until you have time to play it and it can be stuck there for too long. Or it could be totally OP if you managed to get like 3-4 cards from it which is probably the average you would like, then it would be pretty cost efficient, hard to say :)

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

    Staff

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

  • Something is up with the spoilers :( But at least you can read the feedback outside of them.

    Staff

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

    • Quote From shatterstar1998

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

      Breath of Time seems fine, but Plague of Madness is problematic because it's not evenly-matched in effect. Each of the Uldum plagues affect both players equally: Plague of Flames destroys the same number of minions for each player, Plague of Murlocs and Plague of Death affect all minions equally, the real Plague of Madness gives both players a knife, etc. Your card appears to be one sided, making it just another removal card.

      Friendly

  • This is my first time. So wish me luck.

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

    • Quote From h0lysatan

      This is my first time. So wish me luck.

      EDIT: Small version

      EDIT 2: adding another

      Welcome to the glitzy world of fan creations :D Please don't take this the wrong way, but I'm about to slam you with a lot of constructive criticism:

      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!).

      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.

      Friendly
      • 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.

        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 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 :/

          Friendly
          • 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.

  • @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.

    Friendly
    • 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 h0lysatan
        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.

        At least with Platebreaker, your opponent needs to gather a large amount of Armor first for the effect to be valuable, and few classes are capable of doing that.

        EVERY class has the ability to run a Quest and play it on turn 1, which basically guarantees a kill every single time. Every Quest suddenly becomes unplayable when you can kill it instantly.

        Friendly Staff

  • Thoughts on this one?

    • Quote From YJHS2000

      Thoughts on this one?

      A cool way of doing Dragon effects. Although Wing Commander never took off because it was hard to hold a huge amount of Dragons at once, the scaling here is much more significant. I like it.

      The orphan "hand" on the last line alone is a bit of an eyesore for a detail stickler like me, but the card itself seems pretty good all things considered.

      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)

      A bit odd to support Even Mage, don't ya think?

      Anyway, this card seems pretty decently balanced. I like it.

      Friendly Staff

  • 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)

    • 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 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

        • 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.

            Friendly
            • 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 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.

      Friendly

  • https://hearthcards.ams3.digitaloceanspaces.com/d4/ca/7c/19/d4ca7c19.png 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 Elfensilver

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

      Just the once. Allowing more than one entry would open the floodgates for people to spam the competition with content, leading to a quantity vs quality situation. We want creators to put their best ideas out there, rather than just a scattershot effort.

      Friendly

  • @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

    • Quote From thepowrofcheese

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

      I really like it, seems balanced.

  • 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?

    • 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?

      • 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?

        • Quote From ArngrimUndying
          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?

          Only the same limit that forum posts have, which to my knowledge has not been reached since we bumped it up. I don't see any real errors logged on the server-side of things so nothing completely failed which makes this even more fun to diagnose. We'll keep an eye out.

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

    • 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.

      Friendly

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

  • 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.

  • 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.

    Staff
    • 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".

    • 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

      • 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

      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.

      I'm too inexperieced to say something about the card, but you should defintely correct the tribe tag ("Dargon") ;-)

  • 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.

    Staff
    • 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.

      • 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

        Staff
        • 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

          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.

  • 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.

    Friendly
    • Quote From KANSAS

      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.

      Thanks for the kind words. I'll change the art tomorrow to the new one (I feel it fits Hearthstone's aesthetic better) and upload it.

      Staff

  • 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 ShotgunSoul

      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.

      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.

      Staff
      • 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.

  • 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.

    Staff
    • 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. 

  • Show Spoiler
    Content

  • 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!

      Friendly
    • 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.

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

    • 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

      Friendly Staff
      • 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!

  • 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. 

  • 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 [Hearthstone Card (Colosal Lackey) Not Found] and [Hearthstone Card (Dragon Lackey) Not Found], since that would be too convoluted.

    I'm not sure about the name and stats.

    Staff
    • 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 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

        Staff
        • 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

      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.

      Friendly
      • 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.

        Staff
        • 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

  • 50 minutes left! If you haven't already, you should consider submitting your card soon!

    Friendly

  • Here are what scores I gave the finalists:

    • Cavern Explorer - 4 stars - The artwork is really cute and the effect works for Rogue. It lost 1 star though because the artwork quality scales down a bit as you zoom into the card, as well as the fact that the card is a Rare whereas all of the other Explorers are Common, and I didn't really see a reason this card needed to deviate from that cycle.
    • Heist Deviser - 5 stars - I debated for a while whether to give this 4 or 5 stars. The effect is really fun, although sometimes I felt that keeping the Lackeys would actually be better than replacing them with random spells (even with the Cost reduction). Maybe not. It's a nice effect that works best with Rogue, who are just lackey-pumping machines.
    • Archmage Manastorm - 4 stars - Functionally balanced and the art is good. The effect is just a bit underwhelming for the condition.
    • Forsaken Harbinger - 5 stars - I love this card, and is my pick for whom I want to win this competition. Priest really needed Lackey support, and I don't see why they barely got any.
    • EVIL Boomshell - 4 stars - I feel like just playing Clockwork Goblin is going to be better than this because it doesn't need setup. That said, if you can get the setup working, it's going to be awesome!
    • 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.
    • Plague of Undeath - 3 stars - The effect is really cool, but the artwork quite jarringly deviates from Hearthstone's normal art style so much.
    • Dark Resurgence - 5 stars - This is a pretty neat Sidequest, and I like the way the effects are used. Sidequests are not a Warlock mechanic, but I suppose that was the idea.
    Friendly Staff
    • Quote From Demonxz95

      Here are what scores I gave the finalists:

      ...

      • Forsaken Harbinger - 5 stars - I love this card, and is my pick for whom I want to win this competition. Priest really needed Lackey support, and I don't see why they barely got any.

      I also want Forsaken Harbinger to win. It's a great card, and I think whomever made the card is very smart and wise and handsome.

      *awkward cough*

      If I had to knock my card at all, it's that I didn't call it "EVIL Harbinger": it probably should have been called "EVIL (something)", to match the other cards. I didn't think about it until after I submitted. All well. Edit: That being said, Sludge Slurper exists and does not have EVIL in its name.

      Friendly
    • 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.

      • Quote From ZardozSpeakz
        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.

        Ah. Okay, I can actually see that as a reason not to bother with the watermarks. I can see how some may view this as not a huge issue, but all the little details just help make (or break) the card in my opinion. As far as the watermarks go, when they use an existing set, I've always viewed them as meaning along the lines of "if this were a real card, this is the set it would logically make the most sense in". Something to that effect at least.

        Friendly Staff

  • We definitely got a great set of finalists and a lot of good cards that didn't make the cut as well. Won't mention my favourite as I would just jinx it.

    Don't forget to vote everyone, it's looking like it's going to be a close one!

    Staff

  • Congratulations to Shivershine; the results were really close! The next theme is ready to go!

    I'll try not to be salty as the first loser second place finisher.

    Friendly

  • 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 ZardozSpeakz

      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.

      Hm, you know, that never actually came up as a problem "finalists voting on themselves". Since it isn't possible to vote on yourself in the submission phase of the competition, it only makes sense we wouldn't allow it in the finalists.

      Though, it would be funny if someone forgot to give their own card 5 stars in the finals :D

      We'll have to leave that open for now and continue to collect feedback and hold an internal discussion. I think we have a lot of really great people in the community though that legitimately vote so it may not be an issue right now.

      The close scores are also an interesting point to bring up. 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.

      I love the feedback we've gotten on the system so far though and I agree, things are MUCH better here! The best part about it though is that they're only going to improve because we actually have the ability to make changes without needing to go through processes on top of processes. I'm super stoked we have the competitions back and I can't wait for us to extend them to other titles we cover, breaking some ground there.

      Anyway, I'll be leaving much of the decision making up to the Fan Creations team to see how we're going to proceed with any changes since they are much better than I at figuring it out - I'll just be the code monkey getting any potential changes out to everyone :D

      One thing to throw out there, I would love to implement a progress bar showing how many cards you've voted on and how many you have to go. I can't say for certain it'll appear during competition 2 but maybe by 3 I'll be able to get that out there. Anything that can improve the voting experience is A+.

      • 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).

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

    • Quote From Shivershine

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

      Congrats!

      You should have a new avatar border to celebrate :D

    • Quote From Shivershine

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

      Congrats! Your win is also a great encouragement for us other newbies :-