Monthly Card Contest Suggestions

[Cashew]

I'm open to taking suggestions on the Monthly Card Contest at this time. Things you want changed, things you'd like to see remain the same, and any themes you'd love to see in the future. This is an open discussion, so don't be surprised if you see me come back at you with a reply.

[Artifactor]

how about the theme of best instant or sorcery

[KlassyReborn]

How about having a card based on an old mechanic such as sunburst...or even...Rampage!

[final_press]

A month where you have to submit 2 cards that are some way inter-linked? There would probably have to be some further guidelines on what sort of cards to design... but it'd be a nice twist imo.

[Luthervamplord]

Cycle theme - You create a card in a cycle, we have to create another one that would fit to that cycle.

Tribal Theme - Create a card to make a given tribe playable (Not Mainstream like Goblins, Elves, Wizards, Soldiers, etc)

Mythology Theme - Create a card based upon a popular legend/myth or on a creature of historical relevance.

V2 Theme - Take an existing card and ask for their way of reworking the card, i.e Agony Warp.

Vanguard Week - I'd want to see this one, but that's just me.

[Castle]

i agree that vanguard would be fun

also agree with older mechanics such as banding, rampage, ect...

and a theme were you have a non-creature card that turn into creatures such as opal archangel, mishra's factory, and phyrexian totem

[death by aggro]

Partner theme. Everyone signs up by a certain date then gets a randomly selected a person they have to work with on some task (could just be a card, could be more). Also, multiplayer goodness. Teamwork FTW!

[Muse&Force734]

I'm not so excited about vanguard, but...

Multiplayer theme: Build a card with high value in Chaos multi, Emperor or 2 Headed Giant

Cycle Theme: Make a cycle (Luthervamplord's idea)

Make a card that showcases a printable new mechanic.

Your dream card: The (once again) printable card that you've always wanted to see. (For instance, I've always wanted some sort of ultility G/U bounce/naturalize card)

Utility: Rather than making some flashy combo card, we make a viable utility spell.

New Legendary Creature: Very, very simple. Just a new character with backstory.

[boiwithteeth]

Make an Un-Card

restricted to a certain CMC

[KlassyReborn]

we did an un-card already this year...i failed miserably, but that's besides the point!

[Cashew]

I want to share my general philosophy about the themes. I purposefully pick loose themes so that players can create whatever kind of card they want as long as it fits the theme. This lets some of our more creative minds have that freedom they want (of course some still cry about being too restrained). I think the most restrictive ones I've had were the "one at a time theme" which required a permie, and the "tribal theme" which didn't allow creatures.

I'll address what I've gotten so far:

how about the theme of best instant or sorcery
A little bland, needs some kind of spin.

old mechanic such as sunburst...or even...Rampage!
Rampage is too restrictive, Sunburst is interesting, maybe a Rainbow week with a hint to use things like Sunburst.

A month where you have to submit 2 cards that are some way inter-linked
I've long been considering a create-a-cycle theme.

Cycle theme - You create a card in a cycle, we have to create another one that would fit to that cycle.
See above. I don't think this is it though. Giving an inspiration card tends to put people into a very small box.

Tribal Theme - Create a card to make a given tribe playable (Not Mainstream like Goblins, Elves, Wizards, Soldiers, etc)
We've done a Tribal Spell theme. This could be a cool thing though kinda like Tribal Coffee article series.

Mythology Theme - Create a card based upon a popular legend/myth or on a creature of historical relevance.
Was kind of hoping more would do that this month hint hint.

V2 Theme - Take an existing card and ask for their way of reworking the card, i.e Agony Warp.
This would work only if they chose their own card to update. It's not very open to creative people though.

Vanguard Week - I'd want to see this one, but that's just me.
Partner theme.
We did a DD where you could take a creature and up it's status. Regular to Legendary, Legendary to Planeswalker, maybe we could do that and add in Planeswalker to Vanguard.

Multiplayer theme: Build a card with high value in Chaos multi, Emperor or 2 Headed Giant
That's a very good suggestion and will probably see some form of incarnation.

Cycle Theme: Make a cycle (Luthervamplord's idea)
As said, long been thinking about this.

Make a card that showcases a printable new mechanic.
Maybe, I'm a new mechanic hater, having one month to them might be a good concession for banning them from the contest.

Your dream card: The (once again) printable card that you've always wanted to see. (For instance, I've always wanted some sort of ultility G/U bounce/naturalize card)
It's interesting, but not quite a theme. I want cards to be similar enough to judge, plus I'd hate to really tell a person "Your dream sucks."

Utility: Rather than making some flashy combo card, we make a viable utility spell.
Utility and Combo are often a step away, not enough understand utility though.

New Legendary Creature: Very, very simple. Just a new character with backstory.
I'd rather see players upgrade an existing creature into legendary. Backstory tends to sway people away.

Make an Un-Card
Already been done. Won't be seen again anytime soon.

restricted to a certain CMC
A little bland.

[Castle]

i noticed that you didn't comment on my idea of having a card that turns into a creature (like mishra's factory)...maybe ill reword that as having one card type such as enchantment that has a ability or effect that transforms it into another such as a creature or a land for some fun :D or visa versa of the types

also about the "dream card" it not nessiscarly saying you card suxs its saying that this persons dream is more interesting/better XD

[Cashew]

Oh sorry I missed that one. A card type that becomes another..is a good theme, although complex for many I'll consider that one.

[GG Crono]

If you do a theme based on a month, have the actual contest the month before, so that the card is on display for the month it pertains to. Like, if you do a Christmas-themed contest, take entries for it in November, so that it's on display throughout December.

As for a suggestion for a theme: How about a Split Card month? That may be interesting.

[KlassyReborn]

If you do a theme based on a month, have the actual contest the month before, so that the card is on display for the month it pertains to. Like, if you do a Christmas-themed contest, take entries for it in November, so that it's on display throughout December.

As for a suggestion for a theme: How about a Split Card month? That may be interesting.

Or next month do it on thanksgiving...dibs on the giant turkey!

[Maleficent]

Vanguard! :eek: That'd be cool.


how about the theme of best instant or sorcery
A little bland, needs some kind of spin.

Recursive? They have many lots of ways to get more out of them these days, we could go for something new that way. Hm, might need to allow mechanics for it... maybe.


old mechanic such as sunburst...or even...Rampage!
Rampage is too restrictive, Sunburst is interesting, maybe a Rainbow week with a hint to use things like Sunburst.

Haha, Rainbow Week. :paranoid:


Your dream card: The (once again) printable card that you've always wanted to see. (For instance, I've always wanted some sort of ultility G/U bounce/naturalize card)
It's interesting, but not quite a theme. I want cards to be similar enough to judge, plus I'd hate to really tell a person "Your dream sucks

I'll do it! You can still handle the judging, though. :P


As for a suggestion for a theme: How about a Split Card month? That may be interesting.

Just take out "card" and I think it's a winner. :plotting:

How about, for a theme... a printable card that Wizards would never print? :paranoid:

[GG Crono]

For the record, I wasn't actually suggesting a Christmas theme, it was just the clearest example I could think of. XD

[Azrael Subucni]

For the record, let me state that I'm against any more holiday-based themes... this month has been the hardest month to find art for, out of them all. After a dozen searches, I gave up, and am having my friend make art for it.

I personally find the mechanical themes better than the flavor-based themes. I like the vanguard, rainbow, and multiplayer theme ideas. And you could occasionally do slightly more limited themes, based on a single mechanic, or type of spell. Like designing an original counterspell, or burn effect (no color requirements on either).

[Castle]

all i ask for are no color restrictions...make a Halloween card with out black...ha what a laugh :paranoid:

[Luthervamplord]

YAY!!! The love for Vanguard - She grows!!!!!!

[Cashew]

all i ask for are no color restrictions...make a Halloween card with out black...ha what a laugh

Haha, that was part of the challenge. I didn't want a hundred demons, vampires, skeletons, and zombies. I wanted to see some original entries.

[KlassyReborn]

I actually liked the color restriction on the holloween one. It's too easy to make something that involves black.

[GG Crono]

Agreed, that was a very cool idea.

[Your Worst Nightmare]

Hybrid Theme - An entire month dedicated to my personnaly favorite mechanic in Magic, preferently without Augury Adept-like misshaps.

Fortification Theme - Design a fortification to give company to the poor lonely Darksteel Garrison. I'm actually surprised this one hasn't been done yet.

Land Theme - Design a land whose purpose is greater than simply provide mana. i.e Urza's Factory, Wasteland, Rishadan Port, etc.

Mechanic Combo Theme - Design a card that combines two existing keywords in a new way, i.e Arcbound Wanderer and the Future Sight namesakes, Gathan Raiders, Sprout Swarm, Spirit en-Dal, etc.

Planar Chaos Theme - Design a card that could have been printed in Planar Chaos, considering PC's twisted color pie, i.e first strike is primarily black, haste is primarily green, every color has flying, etc. (The Great Mix-Up I (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/daily/mr263) and The Great Mix-Up II (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/daily/mr265), for the uninitiated.)

RFG Zone Theme - Design a card having to do with the removed-from-game zone in any way, i.e it removes itself from the game, it removes others, it brings stuff back from said zone, Stephen Hawking, etc.

Insect Theme - Design an Insect. You can't get any more obvious than that. And I predict Tekk's approval on this theme right away.

Elf Mutilation Theme - Design a new way to mutilate elves. The most awful, gruesome, and horrid one wins.

Bunny Theme - We've had it. No uber-magic. No planeswalkers. No ginormous world-shattering sorceries. We're playing GURPS Bunnies and Burrows. Design a freaking rabbit.

Deviating From The Point Theme - You lost me four ideas ago. What?


EDIT: For the record, I also like the Vanguard idea. :P

EDIT 2: Quickies:
- 5-Color Theme (i.e Cromat, Coalition Victory, Karona, False God, etc.)
- Flip Theme (i.e Nezumi Graverobber, Initiate of Blood, Rune-Tail, Kitsune Ascendant, etc.)
- Worthless Theme (i.e One with Nothing, Mudhole, Pale Moon, etc.)

[ThunderHog]

If Pale Moon was an enchantment, it'd be highly-revered. I find that funny...

[MechMage]

How about an acronim theme. For example, cards might be named "Soldiers Who Occasionally Rally Nobily" or "Fire Lashing Antagonist Scorches Heros".

I don't play magic online, so the idea of a Vanguard month alienates me.

[KlassyReborn]

Vanguard isn't magic online <.< it's just really old

[Tekkactus]

Insect Theme - Design an Insect. You can't get any more obvious than that. And I predict Tekk's approval on this theme right away.

I award this post one :unibrow: point.

[Maleficent]

YAY!!! The love for Vanguard - She grows!!!!!!

D00d, that is totally going to be Brownie Duel #3....

[Your Worst Nightmare]

If Pale Moon was an enchantment, it'd be highly-revered. I find that funny...
It already exists. It's called Blood Moon. :P

[Castle]

It already exists. It's called Blood Moon. :P

true but you can still drop that evil goblin welder XD

[MechMage]

Vanguard isn't magic online <.< it's just really old

Isn't Vanguard when you use your avitar for something? My point remains valid however.

[Cashew]

Isn't Vanguard when you use your avitar for something? My point remains valid however.

Vanguard was paper at least a year before the release of Magic Online starting as oversized cards that affected starting hand size and life, granting a special ability. I believe starting during the Mirages era (1996) as the first Vanguard cards were packaged with their boosters. Magic Online went live in 2002 and Vanguard was wisely put onto all avatars.

There are several thriving Vanguard formats particularly MOMIR Basic which runs almost weekly tournaments with decks featuring nothing but basic lands and a Momir Vig avatar. Cool fact I just found from WotC: to Wizards of the Coast, Magic Online is "somewhere between 30% to 50% of the total Magic business.

You might want to start embracing somewhat the concept of Vanguard, as it's not that alienating it, and if anything it's about time you get in touch with Magic's roots. It's existed far longer than the Mirrordin+ era.

[CoglineErro]

What about a minimalist type theme. Such as, you can only put 8 words in the rules text, or you can only have 1 creature type. Something of that sort.

[Castle]

What about a minimalist type theme. Such as, you can only put 8 words in the rules text, or you can only have 1 creature type. Something of that sort.

so a restriction theme...you cant use the colors red or white on the card and can only use 9 words total, and if a creature the sum of the power and defense can only = 5 or less. sounds like fun :paranoid:

[Cashew]

What about a minimalist type theme. Such as, you can only put 8 words in the rules text, or you can only have 1 creature type. Something of that sort.

I was actually kinda digging that idea. Something like:

This month your card design must be simple. By simple, I mean you have 10 words total. Symbols and P/T do not count. But things like it's Name, Type, Flavor Text, and Abilities do.

Lightning Bolt is 13, so I was thinking maybe 20-30 words, if I actually did it.

[Artifactor]

adding to my theme; instants and sorceries that go break the colorwheel rules

(green counterspells, white burn spells, est).

[Maleficent]

I was actually kinda digging that idea. Something like:

This month your card design must be simple. By simple, I mean you have 10 words total. Symbols and P/T do not count. But things like it's Name, Type, Flavor Text, and Abilities do.

Lightning Bolt is 13, so I was thinking maybe 20-30 words, if I actually did it.

Create a card that can kill Frazzled Editor?

[Cashew]

Create a card that can kill Frazzled Editor?
Perfect.

[KlassyReborn]

Well, how about having a month where we make a utility card, a card which doesn't well on it's own, but works with other cards, and to help people realize where they're going with it, give examples of some cards it works with.

[GG Crono]

Mechanic Combo Theme - Design a card that combines two existing keywords in a new way, i.e Arcbound Wanderer and the Future Sight namesakes, Gathan Raiders, Sprout Swarm, Spirit en-Dal, etc.

This one would be cool. :)

[FrycHiKn]

Or a downgrade a card theme. Going backwards from this month...

[George G]

This is very restrictive but how bout "Make an UNCOMMON that is good enough to take over a rare in booster draft, but is not something you would want four of in a deck."

Reason being, uncommons are the hardest to make(my opinion), and we dont see hardly any in the contests if at all.

[Your Worst Nightmare]

Since it's still three days until I open January's MCC contest, I figure we could channel a discussion to this thread in the meantime. Time to revive it then. Rise again, for you have given new purpose. Rise again, and do my bidding.

*special effects I assure you are visually breath-taking*


The themes of the first four months of 2010 I already have set in stone, and I have a feeling they'll be rather enjoyable. (Two of those four were inspired by suggestions in this very thread, I might add.) Ideas for the months to follow, however, don't appear to be as interesting to my eyes in comparison. Here's what a not-thorough brainstorming made me consider:

-Create a land (In celebration of Zendikar's land theme)
-Create a colorless card (In celebration of Rise of the Eldrazi)
-Create a Phyrexia-themed card (In celebration of Phyrexia vs The Coalition Duel Decks)
-Create a fortification (Give company to poor lonely Darksteel Garrison)
-Create a card that can become another type (Treetop Village, Hidden Stag, Darksteel Brute, etc.)
-Create a token-related card (Scatter the Seeds, Twilight Drover, Leyline of the Meek, etc.)
-Create a card based on the most awesome art you find (Presumably, find art first, make card later)
-Create a card with laughter-inducing flavor text (Not Un, just along the lines of Hunted Dragon)
-Create a Celixia-related card (Are people familiar with the set enough?)
-Create a Timmy?/Johnny?/Spike? card (A three-month cycle?)
-Create an Aggro?/Combo?/Control? card (A three-month cycle?)
-Re-create the theme of April 2009 (design a card based on a song or band) but to movies or video games or characters there-in, etc. (But not all in only one month, naturally.)


Any crowd favorites? Any other suggestions yourself? Discuss. :)

[KlassyReborn]

i like the first 5 ideas, the 3 month cycle thing is just eh to me

[ThunderHog]

Since it's still three days until I open January's MCC contest, I figure we could channel a discussion to this thread in the meantime. Time to revive it then. Rise again, for you have given new purpose. Rise again, and do my bidding.

*special effects I assure you are visually breath-taking*

The themes of the first four months of 2010 I already have set in stone, and I have a feeling they'll be rather enjoyable. (Two of those four were inspired by suggestions in this very thread, I might add.) Ideas for the months to follow, however, don't appear to be as interesting to my eyes in comparison. Here's what a not-thorough brainstorming made me consider:

-Create a land (In celebration of Zendikar's land theme)
-Create a colorless card (In celebration of Rise of the Eldrazi)
-Create a Phyrexia-themed card (In celebration of Phyrexia vs The Coalition Duel Decks)
-Create a fortification (Give company to poor lonely Darksteel Garrison)
-Create a card that can become another type (Treetop Village, Hidden Stag, Darksteel Brute, etc.)
-Create a token-related card (Scatter the Seeds, Twilight Drover, Leyline of the Meek, etc.)
-Create a card based on the most awesome art you find (Presumably, find art first, make card later)
-Create a card with laughter-inducing flavor text (Not Un, just along the lines of Hunted Dragon)
-Create a Celixia-related card (Are people familiar with the set enough?)
-Create a Timmy?/Johnny?/Spike? card (A three-month cycle?)
-Create an Aggro?/Combo?/Control? card (A three-month cycle?)
-Re-create the theme of April 2009 (design a card based on a song or band) but to movies or video games or characters there-in, etc. (But not all in only one month, naturally.)


Any crowd favorites? Any other suggestions yourself? Discuss. :)
Bolded = YES!

[CoglineErro]

If you are feeling adventurous:
Create a card related to riggers and contraptions within normal modern magic.
Create a card with new rules text (ala Obsidian Fireheart).
Create a "missing" Alpha card. (a card that could have been in the set and is worded and rendered as though it were).
Create a card designed to be chaotic.

[Streetz]

I actually liked the fortification idea.

[Lokenta Mirana]

I like the following ideas:



-Create a land (In celebration of Zendikar's land theme)
-Create a colorless card (In celebration of Rise of the Eldrazi)
-Create a Phyrexia-themed card (In celebration of Phyrexia vs The Coalition Duel Decks)
-Create a card that can become another type (Treetop Village, Hidden Stag, Darksteel Brute, etc.)
-Create a token-related card (Scatter the Seeds, Twilight Drover, Leyline of the Meek, etc.)
-Create a card based on the most awesome art you find (Presumably, find art first, make card later)
-Create a card with laughter-inducing flavor text (Not Un, just along the lines of Hunted Dragon)


Also, despite the fact that you prefer cards that are actually played, I think it would be fun to have a month for Vanguard/Plane cards. I realise it was discussed earlier on this thread, but I haven't seen anything come of it.

Cheers, and Happy New Years!

Lokenta Mirana

[p-chan]

I always wanted a "create a new keyword" month XP

In any case, I'm with Streetz, the Fortification idea is my favourite

[Le_Mirage]

Let'see...

Following there are some considerations on the contest itself:


First, i have really never understood all the hate regarding new mechanics. I still believe that the most of the mechanics can be understood in little to no time, despite the fact that the rules behind them can be pretty complex. Still again, i don't think that the scope of this contest should really bother with such details like the functionality of a card in every possible thinkable situation (or in conjunction with every possible real card), at least not over a reasonable level.
On the other hand i understand that people tend to like mechanics a lot, so that would end in a lot or arguing about the lot of mechanics that would show off.

Then, i would add a rating category totally devoted to the adherence of a card to the topic of the month. That's just to allow some fairness between people that focus themself to fulfill the topic the most, and the ones that my prefer to do cards that may be better, but not too much in line with the topic. If the judges tend to overlook the topic a little on the end of the month (maybe because they objectively like some cards more than the others), that can cause a shift in the way we all attend the contest (or at least in the ones that use to dedicate more time on it, like me).


...as for the future topic, i prefer always a topic that allow the most of flexibility in terms of color, type and so on. So, i would avoid the colorless, change-type, Vanguard and fortifications suggestion. I personally don't like a lot the Magic-Setting too, or at least not when it's considered a strong factor against a possible custom flavor (...which i prefer, including real world quotes).
I would thumbs down month-cycle ideas too, as they would finish to "occupy" months too much, while there is indeed some fun and thrill in not know what the topic of the next month will be. Still, i like those ideas. Maybe a "Tommy, Johnny OR Spike" or "Aggro, Combo OR Control" card can be a good alternative.

I like the most the Amazing Art and the Laughter Inducing ideas. I spite of what i wrote before, i would give a go to the Land contest too...as it would be pretty challenging and the idea intrigues me.

...and, to come up with a suggestion, i would like a "create the HATE card" contest, that is, create a card that is powerful (but, of course, not broken or too much easily playable) and, as such, that all the wanna-be strong players would end up playing...and therefore hate for the number of times it will show off.

[Cashew]

First, i have really never understood all the hate regarding new mechanics. I still believe that the most of the mechanics can be understood in little to no time, despite the fact that the rules behind them can be pretty complex. Still again, i don't think that the scope of this contest should really bother with such details like the functionality of a card in every possible thinkable situation (or in conjunction with every possible real card), at least not over a reasonable level.
On the other hand i understand that people tend to like mechanics a lot, so that would end in a lot or arguing about the lot of mechanics that would show off.


New Mechanics / New Keywords have been pretty much banned from most rounds of every contest after we learned the hard way. When you could do them all the time, every person tried to do something new and it wasn't at all about judging Magic cards. People spent more time coming up with keywords than they did cards. As a result you had a bunch of crappy cards and mechanics and people were frustrated by them.

The trick about keywords is that they are just a word. By removing the ability to create new ones they can still invent what might be a keyword, but they aren't wrapped up and enslaved by it.

New mechanics are the same line. You can invent new mechanics, but it is very risky. They must be thought out, executed perfectly, needed, and interesting. Fail in any one aspect and you'll get slammed.

Some of the stuff is silly though. People want to invent a 6th color or a new card type. That's what they say when they want a new mechanic. There is no way to judge that against anything else. The contest is judging the ability to design a Magic card, not a Magic-inspired card. If it can't fit as some part of Magic as it exists then it really can't fit into the contest. The contest naturally grows and evolves as the game does. If you can't find something to do in the constructs of the MTG universe you have issues.

Relation to theme is encompassed in creativity. Also, you ever watch Top Chef or any competition with themed events? You don't have to be a slave to a theme to be inspired by it. Making a category "Theme Adherence" could at most be 1 point. You either are on theme or aren't. Doing it anymore and its just unthinking bias about how you in particular feel about a card's relation to the theme. "Opinion" should not be part of card judging the way the rubric is presented.

[Le_Mirage]

Relation to theme is encompassed in creativity. Also, you ever watch Top Chef or any competition with themed events? You don't have to be a slave to a theme to be inspired by it. Making a category "Theme Adherence" could at most be 1 point. You either are on theme or aren't. Doing it anymore and its just unthinking bias about how you in particular feel about a card's relation to the theme. "Opinion" should not be part of card judging the way the rubric is presented.

It should not be.
Anyway, i think it can be difference between a card that is strongly tiled to the theme, and a card that only walk slightly near it. And that can be rate on a scale bigger than one point, even if smaller than ten.

Of course, that would be right in the case of a fairly abstract theme like the Heat or Halloween one. In the case of a most precise one, like the two creature type one, that would be different already. Still, i don't think that it would be too much mindbreaking to modify the rating scale a little from time to time, given some different type of contest.

[Cashew]

Why does the theme matter so much over the design of the card? Every point you give to something that merely "guides" the designer in a direction takes away from the actual design. I'd hate to see a good card that is kind of on theme lose to an OK card that is all about the theme because one got 1 point for theme and the other got 5 points.

By the time it gets to the vote, the theme is of little concern. I want to see the best cards, not the cards that stick to the theme the best. There is a big difference.

[CoglineErro]

Not including the theme is a dq, but judging how well they fit the theme is an abstract idea. I mean in the case of two creature types, if they don't have two then they are dq'd. If their creature types don't fit the flavor, then they lose flavor points. If they don't fir the abilities, there goes design points. If the two types don't go together, more design points. or one of our past themes, Create a common card that has the text 1/1,-1/-1, or +1/+1 contained in it. Ok, does it have one of those texts? No, dq'd; yes, ok. The rest is design and creativity. What I am trying to get at is, where is there anything missing. Let me give you an example you can respond to to try to explain your point. Let's say the theme is Design a card based on a Norwegian folk dance. Here are the two designs, which should win and what would your judgins be, including a theme rating:
Halling Dancer
2R
Creature- Human
First Strike
~ can only attack or block alone.
2/4

Bygdedans
3RWUBG
Sorcery
Search your library for a creature of each color and put them onto the battlefield. They gain defender until end of turn. Next turn those creatures gain first strike until end of turn and "When this creature loses first strike, sacrifice it."

There are your two. Now show me your meaning.

[Your Worst Nightmare]

Also, despite the fact that you prefer cards that are actually played, I think it would be fun to have a month for Vanguard/Plane cards. I realise it was discussed earlier on this thread, but I haven't seen anything come of it.
We already had a Vanguard month, it was November 2008.

As for plane cards, it'd be impossible to say any one plane is too under/overpowered since they're always symmetrical. If the plane is uber-broken, it'll affect you as well so it's okay. (Here's looking at you, Lethe Lake and Naar Isle.) If the plane is weaksauce, then your opponent doesn't get to exploit it either so it's okay as well. Thus, a balance scale for plane cards is useless. But I guess aesthetics, creativity and design are still available so I guess balance could simply be left out that month. Time will tell. :)

[KlassyReborn]

The colorless idea, IMO will just be putting random cards up, and just changing them to colorless, with EVERYONE's justification for using colored mana to make a colorless card being Ghostfire. As good as the idea seems on paper, and theory, the practice of it would be just as, if not more chaotic than "Create your own keyword/mechanic."

Feel free to argue my point, as I am often wrong.

[CoglineErro]

The idea behind the colorless theme would be the justificatio behind making it colorless if it has a colored mana cost. Ghostfire is the way it is because it gets around protection. Now this card:
Mind of the Eldrazi
3U
Sorcery
~ is colorless.
Draw 2 cards.

would not fit because there is no reason beyond "Spells that counter blue spells can't counter it" for it to be colorless. So the winners would be the ones who made cards with good, elegant reasons for being colorless.

[Le_Mirage]

Not including the theme is a dq, but judging how well they fit the theme is an abstract idea. I mean in the case of two creature types, if they don't have two then they are dq'd. If their creature types don't fit the flavor, then they lose flavor points. If they don't fir the abilities, there goes design points. If the two types don't go together, more design points. or one of our past themes, Create a common card that has the text 1/1,-1/-1, or +1/+1 contained in it. Ok, does it have one of those texts? No, dq'd; yes, ok. The rest is design and creativity. What I am trying to get at is, where is there anything missing. Let me give you an example you can respond to to try to explain your point. Let's say the theme is Design a card based on a Norwegian folk dance. Here are the two designs, which should win and what would your judgins be, including a theme rating:
Halling Dancer
2R
Creature- Human
First Strike
~ can only attack or block alone.
2/4

Bygdedans
3RWUBG
Sorcery
Search your library for a creature of each color and put them onto the battlefield. They gain defender until end of turn. Next turn those creatures gain first strike until end of turn and "When this creature loses first strike, sacrifice it."

There are your two. Now show me your meaning.

I understand your point and the other's, but...that is, it's your point. Before talk about this matter, i have read the usual rating system for the contest and found no specific reference to the theme in any of the categories. So, as far as i can be sure, it appears to have no impact at all to the points, while i think it should a little.
As for your example...on a rate of 5 (which i think will do), i would give the first card 5, and 4 to the second one. That's why the first one was clearly designed knowing what an halling dancer is, while the second one effect, even if named Bygdedans, would be probably appropriate to any kind of group dance.

Your example was a lot specif, but even with a looser topic, some distinctions may arise, and i think you can easily verify that in any of the previous contests. Of course, if any of the judges of any of the players cares more about the adherence to the theme, that's another question.


Why does the theme matter so much over the design of the card? Every point you give to something that merely "guides" the designer in a direction takes away from the actual design. I'd hate to see a good card that is kind of on theme lose to an OK card that is all about the theme because one got 1 point for theme and the other got 5 points.

By the time it gets to the vote, the theme is of little concern. I want to see the best cards, not the cards that stick to the theme the best. There is a big difference.

Well, the good card can lose points in other categories and still be a good card. When it comes to functionality and power, things like flavor, art, wording and the like should be of little concern too (who really cares for "cast" or "play"?). Surely, players use a card for probably a sea of other reasons before art or wording or flavor.

[Sinapptyk]

We could do color- or type-hate.
Like give us a color and/or type, and we have to create a card that counters effectively (though not overpowerdly) what that piece of the color pie is all about.
E.G. If blue was the given color, one card might include "target player cannot search his or her library". Very generic and bland that example was, but you see where I'm coming from.

[MechanicalMind]

-Create a fortification (Give company to poor lonely Darksteel Garrison)
-Create a card that can become another type (Treetop Village, Hidden Stag, Darksteel Brute, etc.)
-Create a token-related card (Scatter the Seeds, Twilight Drover, Leyline of the Meek, etc.)
-Create a card with laughter-inducing flavor text (Not Un, just along the lines of Hunted Dragon)

these ones actually tingle my attention. Could become rather interesting. It's been awhile since i thought of some kind of card that can become something else.

[KlassyReborn]

i shall do all 4 next month ;) just you watch

[JakeKessler]

- Create a card that steers a player towards playing multiple colors. It can have an off-color activation or kicker like the Invasion-block creatures, or perhaps it makes more than one color of mana, or perhaps it rewards the player the more colors/land types they use (a la sunburst or domain). It can even be an actual multicolor card.

[Kamahl's Disciple]

- Create a card that creates and/or works well with tokens.
- Create a card that has an interaction with the graveyard.
- Create a creature card with total power and toughness equal to 10 or greater, essentially a fatty contest.

[Le_Mirage]

Still think that the Amazing Art Theme and the Laughter Inducing Theme can be good ideas. Even the Fatty Contest is interesting.

- Create the obscure but correct card. Like a 10th edition wording Ice Cauldron.
- Create the Common card.
- Create the Eight or more Mana Card.

[Luthervamplord]

- Create the zero-mana cost card
- Create the non-rare Legend card
- Create the new creature-type card
- Create the plane-shifted card
- Create the D&D Hero cards

[MechanicalMind]

- Create the plane card (yeah, i'm a planechase nerd)
- Create the WUBRG card

also, i like the zero-mana, the d&d hero, amazing art, fatties and laughter inducing.

[Your Worst Nightmare]

Thank you for your suggestions. Already see a few that I like, so don't be surprised to see them in the coming months. ;)

On a different note, and in order to give the people something to discuss about in this time of MCC intermission, one theme idea I've mulled over was the creation of two mirrored cards. Since the idea to create a cycle of cards was poorly received, this is the compromise.

What a set of mirrored cards is can be easily explained by merely mentioning their posterchild examples which have been around literally since the beginning of Magic: White Knight and Black Knight.

In other words, for Billy over there who hasn't quite grasped it yet, the idea would be to create two cards that can be considered 'mirrors' of one another. Such can be made as blatantly obvious as Iname, Death Aspect and Iname, Life Aspect, or more subtly like Canopy Claws and Defy Gravity.

Of course, it's not just opposing-colored pairs that can be considered mirrored cards. Mind Spring and Mind Shatter or Kithkin Daggerdare and Kithkin Shielddare can also be considered mirrored pairs. However, this is where things start to go south.

If both enemy-colored pairs and allied-colored pairs are accepted, why shouldn't same-colored pairs be accepted as well? I mean, Essence Scatter and Negate or Mire Boa and River Boa surely can live up to the title, but what about Obsidian Acolyte and Crimson Acolyte or Baleful Stare and Withering Gaze? Do they feel like mirrors of one another, or blatant rip-offs? I mean, they merely replace one color word and call it a different card, how's that for original design? But then again, the very exact same thing also happens with the aforementioned White Knight and Black Knight in the first place, as it's but a difference in one color word! So if the later is considered a mirrored pair and has the exact same defect I find in the former one not to consider it a mirrored pair, how does that work? GAHHH!!!

So where should the line be drawn, if a line should be drawn at all? I personally do think there should be a line, otherwise I foresee a bunch of submissions along the lines of Bloated Toad and Darkwatch Elves, which is nothing more than designing one card then applying Mind Bend to it; or along the lines of Char and Psionic Blast, which is nothing more than designing a hybrid card then rendering a different card for each color. Or do you think I'm being too short-sighted on this aspect and those above are not actually synonyms of bad design?

Well, in which of the following mirrored pairs do you think the line should be crossed then? Or should they all be a-okay in this regard? Explain why!
– Mire Blight and Mortal Wound?
– Concentrate and Harmonize?
– Hedge Troll and Sedge Troll?
– Fallowsage and Hollowsage?
– Braids, Cabal Minion and Braids, Conjurer Adept?
– Akroma, Angel of Fury and Akroma, Angel of Wrath?

Comment, discuss, cast your opinion. :)

[Kamahl's Disciple]

I think submissions with one line of text is fine, just as long as they are fundamentally opposite from each other, BUT not if they are color-worded cards. Color-worded cards are fine as long as they packaged along with an even greater ability that is truly opposite of the card beside it, which would require more then one line of text.

That's my humble opinion.

[p-chan]

Woah, hard things to discuss and even harder things to explain! I don't think that my english will let me explain myself well enough, but hell, here I go!

[...] So where should the line be drawn, if a line should be drawn at all? I personally do think there should be a line, otherwise I foresee a bunch of submissions along the lines of Bloated Toad and Darkwatch Elves, which is nothing more than designing one card then applying Mind Bend to it; [...]I agree in the fact that a line must be drawn, and I think that pairings like White Knight and Silver Knight must be clearly below the line; they are not only simple, but also boring. A different thing could be the mirror White Knight/Blood Knight. Of course first strike and protection from white are well known red abilities, but a good (great) and efficient weenie creature in red? That's a different story, and here I come to my point: the mirror must be original; let's be fair, things like Crimson Acolyte/Obsidian Acolyte can come out of anyone's mind.

BUT. What means original? This is an absolutely subjective thing; in fact, probably most of you, dear readers, think that the knights example above is very unoriginal. So, empirical rules must be written to enjoy a fair and bloody-discussions-free contest; here is my proposal for the rules:

- Avoid some keywords (the most obvious ones): protection from color, landwalk, references to basic lands ...

- The cards must cost, at least, 2 (or 3, what suits better) colored manas. This way, the cards effects will have to be quite proper of their color part of the pie, forcing the designers to think at least a bit.

- Both cards must be related by flavor. What do I mean with this? Easy, Iname, Life Aspect/Iname, Death Aspect follow this rule, Soul Warden/Essence Warden don't.

Of course, these are only ideas from my sick mind, so take them as what they are.

And, in any case, I would really love a "Create a cycle of cards" month.

[MechanicalMind]

Iname, Life Aspect/Iname, Death Aspect follow this rule, Soul Warden/Essence Warden don't.


with a single, small difference: planar chaos's flavor is that that set contains twisted creatures and spells that were already present in the magic multiverse (such as akroma, damnation/wrath of god or crovax), or that would have been printed in future.
It's an anachronistic and chromatically eff'd up expansion set and, in my opinion, it shouldn't be taken into consideration when making this kind of discussions.

[FuDaWg45]

with a single, small difference: planar chaos's flavor is that that set contains twisted creatures that were already present in the magic multiverse (such as akroma, damnation/wrath of god or crovax), or that would have been printed in future.
It's an anachronistic and chromatically eff'd up expansion set and, in my opinion, it shouldn't be taken into consideration when making this kind of discussions.

This.

Mirror cards like White and Black Knight are far different from the planeshifted cards from Planar Chaos.

I'd love to have this as a theme though - I think every set I've made has a set of mirrors in it.

[p-chan]

with a single, small difference: planar chaos's flavor is that that set contains twisted creatures that were already present in the magic multiverse (such as akroma, damnation/wrath of god or crovax), or that would have been printed in future.
It's an anachronistic and chromatically eff'd up expansion set and, in my opinion, it shouldn't be taken into consideration when making this kind of discussions.I think I didn't explain myself pretty well. What I meant is that Soul Warden/Essence Warden have nothing in common when we talk about flavor. One is a human cleric that collects followers to her faith, and the other is an elf shaman that gives other elfs hope to fight Volrath. There are cards in Planar Chaos that follow the rule nº 3: Mirri, Cat Warrior/Mirri the Cursed, Ascendant Evincar/Crovax, Ascendant Hero, Curiosity (http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=6060)/Keen Sense, and a large big etc ...

[FuDaWg45]

Cards of the same color with just Mind Bend are not mirrors - at least in the sense that Dr. Richard Garfield had in mind. He was thinking of things like White Knight/Black Knight. Ankh of Mishra/Dingus Egg.

Planeshifted cards don't count. So no, keen sense and curiosity are not mirrors. Same goes with COncentration/Harmonize. etc.

Cards that later get put in the correct color don't count. Mortal Wound and Mire Blight fall here. Not mirrors - just a reprint. When they made the first one, they weren't thinking secretly "hey we're gonna have a counterpart that's black some day."

The mirror-ness of the cards has to be planned for it to count. That just makes sense. Thus, Fallowsage and Hollowsage are mirrors.

I would say the two Braids are mirrors, and I would say the same for the two Akromas, two Inames, and two Crovaxes. However, the two Kamahls are not mirrors, neither are the Mirris (they're too different, you wouldn't look at one Mirri and think of the other if they didn't have the same name).

Another mirror I can think of: Torture/Daily Regimen.

Just my take on it. Maybe this one is a little too slippery to use as a contest topic.

[JakeKessler]

The mirror-ness of the cards has to be planned for it to count. That just makes sense. Thus, Fallowsage and Hollowsage are mirrors.

I would say the two Braids are mirrors, and I would say the same for the two Akromas, two Inames, and two Crovaxes. However, the two Kamahls are not mirrors, neither are the Mirris (they're too different, you wouldn't look at one Mirri and think of the other if they didn't have the same name).

Another mirror I can think of: Torture/Daily Regimen.

But all those legends you listed (other than Iname) weren't planned, that's the thing. Years later--many years in some cases--they released an alternate version of the same character. Especially in the case of the Planar Chaos legends, Wizards came along much later to release "what if" versions of the existing legends. None of that was planned when the original legends were made though. So does that invalidate them as mirrors?

The same thing with Torture, which was originally from Homelands. Sure, they probably planned to reprint it in Shadowmoor when they released Daily Regimen in Morningtide, but that wasn't planned over a decade ago when Torture was printed for the first time.

So does the lack of planning invalidate all of these Mirrors? Or are cards like Blood Knight and Crovax, Ascendant Hero legitimate mirrors after all? And how does any of this apply to mirrors as a contest topic?

[FuDaWg45]

So does the lack of planning invalidate all of these Mirrors? Or are cards like Blood Knight and Crovax, Ascendant Hero legitimate mirrors after all? And how does any of this apply to mirrors as a contest topic?


Heh, I guess it doesn't. Maybe planning wasn't a good way to put it. I already said Crovax was a fine mirror, and I merely forgot to mention blood knight. He's clearly a mirror too.

I think it applies to mirrors as a contest topic because you'll get lots of people trying to post "mirrors" like Keen Sense/Curiosity or Slay/Execute.

[CoglineErro]

So am i getting a sense that people are opposed to simplicity. "Counter target green creature spell." and "Green creatures can't be countered this turn." are simple mirrors, but require a lot of thought into the color pie. That's my thoguhts on outlawing simplicity.

As for the definition fo a mirror in regards to Magic design, let me quote he who shall not be named: "A two-card cycle is created by doing what we refer to as a "mirror". A mirror is two cards, usually in opposite colors, that have an effect that mirror (thus the name) one another. Classic examples of mirrored cards would be White Knight/Black Knight, Blue Elemental Blast/Red Elemental Blast, and Deathgrip/Lifeforce, all from Alpha. (Can you tell that Richard loves mirrors?) Allied cards can mirror if the two have some similar but flopped effect. The best example of this would be Earthquake and Hurricane. Mirrors can even exist within the same color doing a similar but slightly different effect. The most common example of this kind of mirror would be color hosers (For example, Slay from Planeshift and Execute from Odyssey)." From this article. (http://www.wizards.com/magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtgcom/daily/mr28)
That is what the head designer of all of Magic (like it or not) defines a mirror cycle as.

[Your Worst Nightmare]

I'd love to have this as a theme though - I think every set I've made has a set of mirrors in it.

Maybe this one is a little too slippery to use as a contest topic.
So where do you stand at, after all? Good theme idea, or bad theme idea?

And the rest of you?



So does the lack of planning invalidate all of these Mirrors? Or are cards like Blood Knight and Crovax, Ascendant Hero legitimate mirrors after all? And how does any of this apply to mirrors as a contest topic?
This.

Does it matter that Iname, Life Aspect / Iname, Death Aspect was "planned" to be a set of mirrors from the beginning, whereas Braids, Cabal Minion / Braids, Conjurer Adept only become so years later? Does the time between each one's printing make any difference when you put the two side-by-side TODAY? And how does that relate to a card creation contest, in which both cards will be created on the spot?



As for the definition fo a mirror in regards to Magic design, let me quote he who shall not be named: "A two-card cycle is created by doing what we refer to as a "mirror". A mirror is two cards, usually in opposite colors, that have an effect that mirror (thus the name) one another. Classic examples of mirrored cards would be White Knight/Black Knight, Blue Elemental Blast/Red Elemental Blast, and Deathgrip/Lifeforce, all from Alpha. (Can you tell that Richard loves mirrors?) Allied cards can mirror if the two have some similar but flopped effect. The best example of this would be Earthquake and Hurricane. Mirrors can even exist within the same color doing a similar but slightly different effect. The most common example of this kind of mirror would be color hosers (For example, Slay from Planeshift and Execute from Odyssey)." From this article. (http://www.wizards.com/magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtgcom/daily/mr28)
That is what the head designer of all of Magic (like it or not) defines a mirror cycle as.
This article helps me greatly. Thank you very much. :)

[CoglineErro]

This article helps me greatly. Thank you very much. :)

It's what i do. As well as basic office work. Just don't do windows.

[p-chan]

So where do you stand at, after all? Good theme idea, or bad theme idea?

And the rest of you?Great theme idea. And I insist, the cycle of cards theme would be another great theme idea.

[JakeKessler]

Risky theme idea. If you go ahead with it, be prepared to draw the line of what you consider acceptable in specific, clearly understandable terms. And be prepared for people to object to your definitions. (Remember the confusion about what constitutes a keyword.)

[George G]

As far as the cycle idea, I think the more vague, the better. Not the other way around. Just define how many cards are allowed to be made 3,4, or 5. (one card for each color, as in the Beacons), or 3-4 for the Viashivan, spirit of night, unspeakable kind of thing, or whatever.

Then let us have the freedom to wow YWN or whoever, the only major problem will be finding art for a 5 card cycle, but thats our problem.

[Your Worst Nightmare]

And I insist, the cycle of cards theme would be another great theme idea.
I refer to you the following opinions, express property of other forum members:

There's no way I'm doing 5 illustrations in a month.

As much as I like the idea of a cycle, me getting the permission of several artists from DA for their art for that many cards is a staggering feat and I don't think I am able to do it. Since all art is copyrighted in DA to begin with, getting one is already a daunting task.
So before jumping head-first onto something potentially catastrophic, let's first see how two cards in one month works out before thinking about five, m'kay? :)

[FuDaWg45]

I think my final opinion on mirrors is that it's probably not a great idea, unless you specify, as Jake said, exactly what is acceptable and what isn't. You should also have continuing feedback on submissions - just in case someone submits something that they think is a mirror but, as far the contest is concerned, is not.

[Le_Mirage]

Oh well, as someone has already said, two cards can be mirror for more than one reason:

-They have the same effect with slightly differences (the knights)
-They have one the opposite effect of the other
-They explore similar aspect of their color (or of different colors...the case of the counters)
-They are the same card but with different color (the Psionic Blast and Char example, that exist just because the blast was considered back in the day a viable blue card, differently from today)

They last case is tricky: two cards that are the same are not to be considered (forcibly) as an hybrid, since the most important thing is that you can play eight of them, therefore having, infact, eight time the same card instead of four. That's a big difference. The wizards have surely noted (and liked :)) this fact when, during the time spiral block, they have let those two shots exists in standard.

So all the example YWN posted before i think are valid. Anyway, i think it's even a matter of flavor: two card are not to be mirrors just because one say "counter instant" and the other "counter sorcery", at least not if they are clearly cards not related to each other (differently from the protection disciples, as they surely are).

I think it's even much more a matter of feel than rules. I would say just throw the contest in if you want, and let's see what happens :D.

[GG Crono]

As I lay in bed last night, an idea for a potential MCC struck me.

Create a legendary creature card with at least one creature type that has never before appeared on a printed legendary creature card.

So, for example, a "Legendary Creature - Elf Scout" would be a valid entry, since while there's been legendary elves, there's never been a legendary scout.

[evol_intentions]

As I lay in bed last night, an idea for a potential MCC struck me.

Create a legendary creature card with at least one creature type that has never before appeared on a printed legendary creature card.

So, for example, a "Legendary Creature - Elf Scout" would be a valid entry, since while there's been legendary elves, there's never been a legendary scout.

I love this theme, and in fact i often make legends for underused races, just because its fun.
Although i would prefer a stick to races than classes but thats just pernickety

[JakeKessler]

This is kind of cool, but it does railroad people into making creature cards (and legendary creature cards at that). Not saying that's a deal-breaker, but it does pigeonhole the entries substantially. Imagine if the contest was "create a land" or "create a blue instant".

[Le_Mirage]

As i already worte, differently from the other kind of contests with strong constraints (as "create the blue instant" may be) i would give a try to the "create the land" one, since it would be really challenging.

[Kamahl's Disciple]

How about a contest with cards only converted mana cost 6 or greater?

[CoglineErro]

Or even better, a contest with only converted mana cost of a certain number. Now that the "That's too narrow" crowd has quieted down, it would be an interesting challenge to, say, design a card with converted mana cost 2 that has never been done before in that color. Best CMC in my opinion? 1. Second best? 5. Just saying.

[ojdavies]

What about a contest where the cards have to synergise with a card that already exists? I think that will allow a lot of scope for creativity while being suitably limiting.