Here's a thing that's always dawned on me about the MTG companions ever since they were revealed is how would you prove it?
In Hearthstone, the game is obviously digitized, so the game can just check and confirm your deck is built the right way for you. I assume the same would happen for MTG Arena when these cards get released there.
But in paper Magic, what do you do? Is your opponent allowed to check your deck to verify that your Companion's ability can be used? Would you need someone from outside the game to do that so that your opponent can't read your deck? In competitive play with judges, that might not be such a problem, but in play without judges, who's going to verify your deck is built correctly? Are they just supposed to take your word for it?
Here's a card I made for clukudurk's Gunslingers of Westfall expansion that I was a part of building, where the card ended up being one of my favorites of the set.
Hey, congrats Devizz. Can't wait to see your theme.
Despite placing 29th out of 44 entries (not counting the two that were disqualified), I find it incredible that 7 people gave my card 5 stars, which is more than most of the entries near my position. And it literally only has one word in its textbox.
Congrats to everyone who made it to the finalists. Kind of sad I didn't make it, but there is always next time!
I would like some more feedback on my card to see where I went wrong so I can design better next time. Every competition I think my card is super strong, but I never to make it to the finals. Advice on designing better cards would be greatly appreciated.
My card:
Show Spoiler
Where did I go wrong? Where did my card fall short?
Your card was actually the only card in the entire competition that I simply didn't gave a rating to.
The reason for this is that it's REALLY sketchy to judge this. The card would be either game-breakingly OP or utterly unplayable, and this is a characteristic that applies to all "infinite" cards like this. I really had no idea how I would vote for it, so I thought the fairest I could do was simply not vote for it, in return, not affecting its average score.
Thoughts on my submitted card? The idea is to give support to both quest where you could run more weapons in the old quest since Warrior has enough taunts to make it work or add more taunts in the new quest to give your quest support while protecting any unwanted damage.
I personally gave it a 4-star rating. I love the art (although it looks a bit low-res when zoomed in this much), and it's thematically appropriate. That said, +2/+2 on a weapon is a VERY HUGE buff.
Because the minions gaining Taunt would not be considered "Taunt minions", they wouldn't actually help with Fire Plume's Heart, and thus this card isn't eligible for the competition.
Kael'thas Sunstrider - The third spell costs (1) instead of (0). Or make it so that the effect only happens once per turn. Honestly, I thought its effect being able to occur multiple times per turn was a bug until I re-read the card.
Open the Waygate - More than 6 spells needed to get Time Warp. Nowadays, casting 6 spells from outside your deck is just something that naturally happens every game for Mages, and it has been for a while.
Bloodbloom - 3 mana? I don't really see another change they could make without revamping the whole card altogether.
Sacrificial Pact - Changed to only target friendly Demons. The card was never intended to really be able to kill enemies in the first place. Its ability to do so was harmless when only Warlock had any Demons, but now there's Demon Hunter.
Sorry if this isn't an appropriate place to ask this. When we're choosing which expansion our card is part of, are there any considerations besides flavor? Specifically, do we need to worry about keywords on our card that didn't exist during the expansion we chose? E.g., Rush on a card from anything before The Witchwood.
Some people aren't bothered by it so much, but it's a little detail that paying attention to will make the card all the more professional looking.
I've always been one to given penalties in my scoring to cards that use the wrong watermark (and a few others have been too), simply because it looks unprofessional. Using the Classic watermark on a card with no post-launch mechanics (regardless of flavor) is fine, but otherwise, an incorrect watermark stands out like a sore thumb and it ends up looking as if they were apathetic about their card from the start and didn't really care how it would turn out.
If your card uses a post-launch mechanic and you're unsure what set to put it in or it was made with none in mind, using a custom watermark is a much better, more professional way to communicate this than simply using the Classic watermark. Some may view this as a nitpick, but being a nitpick doesn't mean it isn't a valid criticism.
Sacrificial Pact was never meant to be able to used as removal. Destroying friendly Demons was basically what the card was meant for, as back then, Warlock was the only class with any Demons. Now that Demon Hunter has Demons, Sacrificial Pact is basically just a tech card against them.
I definitely would change it to only affect friendly Demons. That's basically how the card was intended to be the whole time, and you wouldn't be able to kill Jaraxxus with it anymore.
I am not yet sure of the name/theme of the card, but I like the effect. It's like a Dreadsteed that won't cause as many problems.
I also made these cards just in case my first card isn't good enough
Show Spoiler
Immovable Statue is just a small defensive tool which probably isn't good and may not even be interesting enough to post about, but I am just throwing ideas onto the wall and seeing what sticks.
Dwarf Blacksmith equips your soldiers for battle with well crafted swords. This is the card I feel strongest about.
Call for Reinforcements! is just flat card draw.
Mighty Warleader is a big swing tool for warriors. It fills your board and then leads them into battle with a powerful and inspiring battle cry!
Immovable Statue is a strictly better Public Defender, and it also might be too strong. Mighty Warleader also shouldn't use the Classic watermark when it uses Rush, and it does also have anti-synergy with the Quest. Dwarf Blacksmith and Call for Reinforcements! seems good if a bit basic.
Recurring Nightmare might be a bit scary, but I'm not sure.
Ok, got a couple ideas going. Apparently I'm feeling like a spell for this one...
I'll go through and give feedback when I have some time later today.
Stand Your Ground does not work as you envision it would. When a Taunt minion gains Immune, it cancels its Taunt until it loses Immune, exactly like Stealth. Or, maybe that was what you were going for?
Tunnel Explosives I like better, but I'm not sure I understand the flavor.
Some feedback for those who have posted; I was waiting for the group to expand a bit.
Show Spoiler
Conduit - An interesting thought, but as Wailor noted it's overpowered. Losing Taunt is not a big enough downside to warrant being a 3/4/4; it might even be a good thing, depending on the circumstances.
Hordaki - I like it, but I wonder if people would care about the bonus Taunt effect and instead just run it because it's guaranteed removal with a body. Being a Mech also means you can Magnetize Zilliax onto it. I love that artwork, though; it makes for great flavor.
TheHoax91 - As Sinti noted, I don't believe it fulfills the prompt as currently written. It's hard to say whether or not a handbuff-ed "Taunt" minion would count as an actual Taunt minion for the Quest; if it doesn't work, then the Shield "Bearer" fails to satisfy the competition's rules.
Mr Rhapsody - Unfortunately, while it is amusing, I don't believe you can capitalize the letters of EVIL and get away with it. You can't have two cards with the same name, even with that slight distinction :P
Wailor - Fire Plume's Heart forces you to play the Taunt minions; it does not let you summon them like Awaken the Makers. With that in mind, I would say Fel Horde does not follow the prompt in its current form. There's a reason players don't use Protect the King! (other than it being a bad card, but that's not my point lol). I understand what you're trying to do with Runic Armorsmith, but it took me a minute to get it and that could be a bad sign :(
Here's a thing that's always dawned on me about the MTG companions ever since they were revealed is how would you prove it?
In Hearthstone, the game is obviously digitized, so the game can just check and confirm your deck is built the right way for you. I assume the same would happen for MTG Arena when these cards get released there.
But in paper Magic, what do you do? Is your opponent allowed to check your deck to verify that your Companion's ability can be used? Would you need someone from outside the game to do that so that your opponent can't read your deck? In competitive play with judges, that might not be such a problem, but in play without judges, who's going to verify your deck is built correctly? Are they just supposed to take your word for it?
Here's a card I made for clukudurk's Gunslingers of Westfall expansion that I was a part of building, where the card ended up being one of my favorites of the set.
In addition to what Link said, it actually breaks another rule of Hearthstone card design, which is that you can't select cards that are in your hand
Hey, congrats Devizz. Can't wait to see your theme.
Despite placing 29th out of 44 entries (not counting the two that were disqualified), I find it incredible that 7 people gave my card 5 stars, which is more than most of the entries near my position. And it literally only has one word in its textbox.
Your card was actually the only card in the entire competition that I simply didn't gave a rating to.
The reason for this is that it's REALLY sketchy to judge this. The card would be either game-breakingly OP or utterly unplayable, and this is a characteristic that applies to all "infinite" cards like this. I really had no idea how I would vote for it, so I thought the fairest I could do was simply not vote for it, in return, not affecting its average score.
I personally gave it a 4-star rating. I love the art (although it looks a bit low-res when zoomed in this much), and it's thematically appropriate. That said, +2/+2 on a weapon is a VERY HUGE buff.
After not logging on for quite a few hours, having the thumbnail immediately just appear in front of my eyes was kinda scary.
Because the minions gaining Taunt would not be considered "Taunt minions", they wouldn't actually help with Fire Plume's Heart, and thus this card isn't eligible for the competition.
I find it really weird that they're buffing Libram of Justice. Isn't it already pretty good?
Either way, my guesses are:
Don't forget to enable your CDC border
Some people aren't bothered by it so much, but it's a little detail that paying attention to will make the card all the more professional looking.
I've always been one to given penalties in my scoring to cards that use the wrong watermark (and a few others have been too), simply because it looks unprofessional. Using the Classic watermark on a card with no post-launch mechanics (regardless of flavor) is fine, but otherwise, an incorrect watermark stands out like a sore thumb and it ends up looking as if they were apathetic about their card from the start and didn't really care how it would turn out.
If your card uses a post-launch mechanic and you're unsure what set to put it in or it was made with none in mind, using a custom watermark is a much better, more professional way to communicate this than simply using the Classic watermark. Some may view this as a nitpick, but being a nitpick doesn't mean it isn't a valid criticism.
Sacrificial Pact was never meant to be able to used as removal. Destroying friendly Demons was basically what the card was meant for, as back then, Warlock was the only class with any Demons. Now that Demon Hunter has Demons, Sacrificial Pact is basically just a tech card against them.
I definitely would change it to only affect friendly Demons. That's basically how the card was intended to be the whole time, and you wouldn't be able to kill Jaraxxus with it anymore.
Immovable Statue is a strictly better Public Defender, and it also might be too strong. Mighty Warleader also shouldn't use the Classic watermark when it uses Rush, and it does also have anti-synergy with the Quest. Dwarf Blacksmith and Call for Reinforcements! seems good if a bit basic.
Recurring Nightmare might be a bit scary, but I'm not sure.
I'm just saying this because we already have an entry that will be disqualified...
Summoning Taunt minions without playing them does not count towards Quest progression. In this regard, it's anti-synergy with the Quest.
Be sure to look at all of the rules carefully before you submit.
Stand Your Ground does not work as you envision it would. When a Taunt minion gains Immune, it cancels its Taunt until it loses Immune, exactly like Stealth. Or, maybe that was what you were going for?
Tunnel Explosives I like better, but I'm not sure I understand the flavor.
I feel like proper wording would be. "Taunt. When this minion takes damage, it loses Taunt."
:(
So I'll start us off with a card.
Simple enough to understand.
Congrats Shaveyou.
First repeat winner.
Ha, now I finally got it.