Contest March 2021 CaC: Generation 4 (All Results Up!)

[All-Stars_Creator]

I might as well join, but I'm probably going to break a few of the rules. The reason being, that I will post a card from my 'All-star' custom format.
There are many things different in my own custom Format. First of, stats wise, Pokémon are a lot weaker in terms of numbers compared to the current format. I started the project in 2010, and most Pokémon are comparable, if not a little stronger, to Stormfront era cards. Second, I have my own names and wordings. For instance, I use Traits, that are functionally identical to Poké-bodies. I liked the flexibility of being able to target effects to Powers or Bodies, but I felt that "Body" was too limiting in what I could use from a Pokémon. Hence, me using 'Traits'.

Finally, I realize we're being judged on the wording of the standard format. However, for various reasons, for my own custom cards in the All-star format, I only ever try to remain consistent with my own wordings. The most important reason for that is that I assume a lot of standard clauses in order to save space.

Having said all that, it's still a gen-4 Pokémon, and I think it's pretty cool.

Being a Pokémon* (pronounced; Pokémon star), in my format works basically like a Lv.X, that you don't need to put on top of an Active Pokémon. So it can use the attacks of the card below it.

Spoiler: Submission

Cresselia* (P)
Put on top of Cresselia HP 120

Trait: Gravity trick room
Each Pokémon in play that has a retreat cost of (C)(C)(C)(C) or more, now retreats for (.). Each Pokémon in play that has a retreat cost of (C)(C)(C) now retreats for (C). Each Pokémon in play that has a retreat cost of (C) now retreats for (C)(C)(C). Each Pokémon in play that has a retreat cost of (.) now retreats for (C)(C)(C)(C). Apply Trick gravity after all other effects on retreat cost.

Power: Moon reflection
Cresselia* can use this Power even if it’s asleep. Once during your turn, you may move 1 damage counter from any Pokémon in play, to any other Pokémon. If Cresslia* is asleep, you may move up to 3 damage counters instead.

W: (P) R: RC: (C)(C)(C)

So I don't expect this card to do well in the judging criteria. But would love to hear some feedback on it. It's one of the cards that I like, but am not quite sure about for the weirdness of it. And I also finally found a place to talk about custom PTCG cards, so I thought I'd let slip a little of what I'm working on.

 

[Jabberwock]

That's a wrap! Stay tuned for @The Ωmega One's and @47bennyg's judging coming at the end of the month, and remember, the next round is coming right up in April!

 

[Vom]

Well, it only took me 25 years to decide what card to make this time.

Spoiler

[Stage 2] Empoleon HP160 [W]
Evolves from Prinplup

NO. 395 Emperor Pokémon HT: 5'07''WT: 186.3 lbs.

Ability: Monarch's Sovereignty
All of your Pokémon that have Piplup, Prinplup, or Empoleon in their name can use the attacks of any Pokémon with Piplup, Prinplup, or Empoleon in its name in play or in your discard pile. (You still need the necessary Energy to use each attack.)

[W][W][W] Falling Guillotine 130+
You may search your discard pile for a [W] Pokémon and put it onto your Bench. If you do, and if any of your Pokémon were Knocked Out by damage from an attack from your opponent's Pokémon with a Rule Box (Pokémon V, Pokémon-GX, etc. have Rule Boxes) during their last turn, this attack does 130 more damage.

Weakness: [L] x2
Resistance: -
Retreat: [C][C]
It avoids unnecessary disputes, but it will decimate anything that threatens its pride.

Spoiler: References

Falinks+Falinks V (kinda?)
My Nidoking entry's feedback from the Space CaC
Mew+Mewtwo TTGX
Empoleon V
Machamp+Marshadow TTGX

 

[Vom]

im sorry jabber

 

[Fariszk7]

I'm a little overdue but I got approval to send it in anyway. Hope you like

Spoiler: entry

 

[47bennyg]

Text-Based Results

Judge: @47bennyg

Spoiler: Anime Psyclone’s Corrin (Male)’s Garchomp EX

Corrin (Male)’s Garchomp EX - [DR] - HP: 150 - Stage 2: Evolves from Gabite
Ability: For Hoshido!: Whenever damage counters are placed on this Pokémon, you may discard as many Energy cards attached to this Pokémon as you like. For every [DR] Energy card discarded, reduce the amount of damage by 30, for every [FT] discarded, reduce the damage by 20, and for any other type of energy, reduce by 10. The amount of damage counters cannot be reduced to under 10 damage.

[DR] [DR] [FT] [CO] Dragon Fang: Quake - 10+
Flip a coin until you get tails. This attack does 10 damage plus double the amount of heads.

Weakness: Water: 3x
Resistance: Lightning: -10
Retreat Cost: [CO] [CO]

Wording Errors:
-Evolves from Corrin♂'s Gabite (to be consistent with other owner’s Pokémon in the past in TCG). (-1 point)
-[N][N][F][C] Your energy symbol notation totally makes sense, but for the future, here are the more standardized ones. I’m not sure where to actual find a resource that points to these as the standard, but here they are: [G] Grass [R] Fire [W] Water [L] Lightning [F] Fighting [P] Psychic [D] Darkness [M] Metal [N] Dragon [Y] Fairy [C] Colorless (-0 points)
-”This attack does 10 damage plus double the amount of heads.” Unclear wording. If I take it at face value, if I flip two heads, this would do 14 damage total (which isn’t something that happens in the Pokémon TCG). (-3 points)
-Missing Pokédex info and flavor text. (-1 point)
-Your ability refers to both damage counters and damage, which are two different things. Also with each type of energy listed, the wording should be consistent each time. (-3 points)
Here’s a sample of how it might look:

Whenever your opponent puts damage counters on this Pokémon, you may discard as many Energy cards attached to this Pokémon as you like. For every [N] Energy card discarded, reduce the amount of damage counters by 3. For every [F] Energy card discarded, reduce the amount of damage counters by 2. For any other type of Energy card, reduce the amount of damage counters by 1. The amount of damage counters cannot be reduced to under 1.

Creativity/Originality: 16/20
The Fire Emblem crossover is nice, and I think Garchomp is probably the best dragon that fits with the aesthetic of the FE. The ability also encourages good gameplay decisions: how many energy can I afford to discard? Do I just discard them all and erase the hit? Do I just discard one so I can still attack next turn. Very nice.

Wording: 6/15
Biggest way to grow in this section is to clarify what that attack does.

Believability/Playability: 5/15
HP is a little low for an EX, also the evolution mechanic is more consistent with a Pokémon-ex or GX rather than EX (which were all Basics). Weakness and Resistance were not x3 and -10 during the EX era. In terms of playability, it seems very reasonable, but gated by high energy costs, but ultimately I’m not sure because I’m not sure what the attack is supposed to do. Also, although Dragon has been used as a type in the TCG, it has never been used as an energy cost, as there have never been energy cards that provide dragon type energy. Usually dragons have a combination of two or more other types of energy in their cost, Garchomp specifically usually being [W] and [F], but more recently it has just been [F].

Total: 28/50

Spoiler: DashKing’s Empoleon

Empoleon
Type: [W] – HP 170
Stage 2: Evolves from Prinplup
NO. 395 Emperor Pokémon HT:5'07'' WT: 186.3 lbs

Ability: Emperor’s Command
Once during your turn, you may put a Piplup or Prinplup from your discard pile onto your Bench.

[.] Continual Whirlwind 50
You must discard a card from your hand in order to use this attack. Switch this Pokémon with 1 of your Benched Pokémon. If that Pokémon is a Piplup, Prinplup, or Empoleon with the Continual Whirlwind attack, you may use Continual Whirlwind again this turn.

[W] Emperor’s Mandate 10
If a Piplup, Prinplup, or Empoleon were Knocked Out by damage from an opponent’s attack during their last turn, during your next turn, each Empoleon’s Continual Whirlwind attacks does 30 more for each of your Piplup and Prinplup in play.

Weakness: [L] X 2
Resistance:

Retreat: [C][C]
Dex Entry: It swims as fast as a jet boat. The edges of its wings are sharp and can slice apart drifting ice.

Wording Errors:
-Continual Whirlwind needs a clause similar to Bunnelby PCL’s Ancient Trait: (If the first attack Knocks Out your opponent’s Active Pokémon, you may attack again after your opponent chooses a new Active Pokémon.) (-2 points)
-In your post, you reference that Emperor’s Mandate “maxes at 200 with four Empoleon in play without ‘Emperor’s Mandate.’” However, the way it is written, there is nothing that limits the damage except for discarding cards. If you have 2 Empoleon, you can switch back and forth between them and hit numbers like 350 or 400 as long as you discard 7 or 8 cards. If you want it to match the intended effect you put in your write-up, you need more clarifying text, probably something to the effect that each Empoleon can only use Continual Whirlwind once per turn. (-3 points)

Creativity/Originality: 17/20
While it is a little coincidental that there are two Empoleon entries that bring back Pokémon from the discard, overall the design of the card is well enough related to Empoleons of the past, while still carving its own niche. Continual Whirlwind is very unique in the Pokémon TCG as well.

Wording: 10/15

Believability/Playability: 9/15
While I think the skeleton of this card is pretty believable, I don’t necessarily find this amount of damage output for no Energy to be realistic. There are plenty of powerful draw cards in the game that can take advantage of this (Professor’s Research, Zebstrika LOT, Colress, etc.) and make it powerful because you could run this in a deck with 0 energy. I feel like some of the more powerful aspects of this card should be gated by more costs. Additionally, Sword/Shield era cards with an ability only have 1 attack.

Total: 36/50

Spoiler: FireLizard’s Honchkrow

Honchkrow HP 120 [D]
Stage 1-Evolves from Murkrow

[Ability] Count of the Darkness
Your [D] Pokèmon has no Weakness and do 20 more damage to your opponent's Active Pokémon (before applying Weakness and Resistance). You can't apply more than 1 Count of the Darkness at a time.



[C] [C] Evocation
Search your deck for a Basic [D] Pokémon, reveal it, and put it into your Bench.If your opponent has Pokémon V or Pokémon-GX in play,search your deck for an Evolution [D] Pokémon instead.Then, shuffle your deck.Either case,attach a [D] Energy from your hand to that Pokèmon.



Weakness: [L] x2
Resistance: [F]-20

Retreat: [C]

"It will absolutely not forgive failure from or betrayal by its goons. It has no choice in this if it wants to maintain the order of the flock."

Wording Errors:
-have no weakness instead of has (-1 point)
-é instead of è in Pokémon (-1 point)
-”You can't apply more than 1 Count of the Darkness Ability at a time” (-2 points)
-Aegislash RCL “You can’t apply more than 1 Big Shield Ability at a time.”
-Missing spaces between punctuation and words (-1 point)
-”If your opponent has any Pokémon V or Pokémon-GX in play” (-2 points)
-Lycanroc CEC “If your opponent has any Pokémon-GX or Pokémon-EX
in play”
-The “either case” doesn’t have any precedent, and there is existing syntax that fits with what you are doing (-2 points)
-Electrode VIV “If you searched your deck in this way, this Pokémon is Knocked Out.”
-”If you put a Pokémon on your Bench in this way, attach a [D] Energy from your hand to that Pokémon.”
-Resistance is -30 in the Sword and Shield era. (-1 point)

Creativity/Originality: 16/20
You’ve designed a solid support mon here that explores some good ideas, but it’s not necessarily anything groundbreaking. All the abilities that this Honchkrow has, have been seen before in the game, but combining them onto an ultimate supporter is cool.

Wording: 5/15
You can make up a lot of ground in this section next time just by cleaning up a few small things.

Believability/Playability: 13/15
This card is good, but the attack is a little redundant in its use in today’s game. You mentioned a synergy with Eternatus VMax, and I can see that in the ability, but I don’t think that in the current standard meta it would be used to get Eternatus VMaxes onto the bench. You have to get an Evolution Pokémon in play and attach an energy to it to get the effect of adding a better evolution card to your bench. Why wouldn’t you just get the better evolution in the first place?

Total: 34/50

Spoiler: Falling Skies’s Floatzel V

Floatzel V HP: 200 [W]
Basic

Ability: Last-Second Rescue
When 1 of your Basic Pokémon is Knocked Out by damage from an opponent's attack, you may discard all cards attached to that Pokémon and attach it to this Pokémon as a Pokémon Tool card. This Pokémon may have any number of Pokémon attached to it as Pokémon Tool cards. If it loses this ability, discard Pokémon Tool cards attached to it until 1 remains.

[W][W] Shore Storming 50x
Put all Pokémon Tool cards attached to this Pokémon into your hand. This attack does 50 damage for each card put into your hand in this way.

Weakness: [L] x2
Resistance:
Retreat: [C]

V rule: When your Pokémon V is Knocked Out, your opponent takes 2 Prize cards.

Wording Errors:
-The wording looks very clean, and is consistent with other cards that have similar effects. However, I am taking off points because I think it needs just a little bit more clarification about its unlimited attachments.

Currently, the wording for normal tools is “Attach a Pokémon Tool to 1 of your Pokémon that doesn’t already have a Pokémon Tool attached.” With this wording, I would assume that you can first attach a normal tool card before attaching any Basic Pokémon (because you can have any number of those), but if you attached a Basic Pokémon first, you couldn’t attach a normal tool afterward (because those can only be attached if there isn’t one attached). I’m not sure if this is an intended loophole or not - but because it can only be done one way and not the other it feels like a loophole, which makes me think that you need text to clarify it in case of questions. Maybe just something like “This Pokémon may have any number of Pokémon attached to it as Pokémon Tool cards and/or 1 Pokémon Tool attached to it” (-3 points)

Creativity/Originality: 20/20
Lots of great things to say about the originality of this card. The attack and ability are very tied to the lore of Floatzel, which is awesome. Both the attack and ability are new and unique which is awesome. When I read this card at first I was picturing how I would put together a deck for it - which is definitely the kind of thoughts you want to inspire!

Wording: 12/15
Just the tool loophole to clarify here.

Believability/Playability: 14/15
I think the biggest weakness of this card is the difference between the possibilities for it in Expanded and Standard. It is very underpowered in an environment without Klefki STS and Shedinja LOT, which you admitted in your write-up. Pokémon in general doesn’t balance new things for the Expanded format - that’s why there is a ban list for it - so it seems less believable that this card would be printed over one that had its damage output actually scaled for Standard format. Maybe the damage is tweaked if one of those Pokémon attached had a Rule Box?

Total: 46/50

Spoiler: Kangaflora’s Magnezone

Magnezone - 170HP - [L]
Stage 2: Evolves from Magneton
NO. 462 Magnet Area Pokémon HT: 3'11" WT: 396.8 lbs.

ABILITY: Active Dualing
As long as this Pokémon is in the Active Spot, it is [L] and [M] type.

[L][C][C] Super Thunder Bolt - 120

[L][L][C][C] Zap Cannon - 200
During your next turn, this Pokémon can't use Zap Cannon.

Weakness: [F]x2
Resistance:
Retreat: [C][C]

Some say that Magnezone receives signals from space via the antenna
on its head and that it's being controlled by some mysterious being.

Wording Errors:
-None that I can see.

Creativity/Originality: 5/20
This is where this card struggles the most. There has already been a Magnezone with the same attack and the same effect (Magnezone FLI & UPR) and one with a dual type ability (Magnezone UNM, although that one works just while it is in play). The most creative thing on this card is the ability name, which I quite like

Wording: 15/15

Believability/Playability: 14/15
Very realistic, considering we have current cards with near identical abilities in the format (Blaziken DAA, Gallade CEC, and Magnezone UNM). However, all Sword and Shield era cards with Abilities (so far) have only one attack, so minus one for that on the realism scale.

Total: 34/50

Spoiler: All-Stars_Creator’s Cresselia*

Cresselia* (P)
Put on top of Cresselia HP 120

Trait: Gravity trick room
Each Pokémon in play that has a retreat cost of (C)(C)(C)(C) or more, now retreats for (.). Each Pokémon in play that has a retreat cost of (C)(C)(C) now retreats for (C). Each Pokémon in play that has a retreat cost of (C) now retreats for (C)(C)(C). Each Pokémon in play that has a retreat cost of (.) now retreats for (C)(C)(C)(C). Apply Trick gravity after all other effects on retreat cost.

Power: Moon reflection
Cresselia* can use this Power even if it’s asleep. Once during your turn, you may move 1 damage counter from any Pokémon in play, to any other Pokémon. If Cresslia* is asleep, you may move up to 3 damage counters instead.

W: (P) R: RC: (C)(C)(C)

You mentioned Stormfront era as a power level, so I’ll use that as well to inform my ruling.

Wording Errors:
-Lv. X wording is "put onto" if you want to follow that, it’s just more succinct, but yours isn’t technically wrong (-0 points)
-Gravity Trick Room and Moon Reflection (-1 point)
-When a specific retreat cost is mentioned, Pokémon has used a number (or “no Retreat Cost” for 0, starting in the BW era). When retreat costs are modified by addition or subtraction, energy symbols are used. Float Stone PLF and Air Balloon SWSH are a good example of the difference. Your Trait sets retreats to a specific number, so numbers should be used. (-2 points)
-Capitalize Retreat Cost (-1 point)
-You have two different names for your Trait (-1 point)
-”you may move 1 damage counter from 1 Pokémon to another Pokémon.” I’ve included the most recent syntax for this type of effect, but there are multiple different ways that it has been formatted in the past (including on a Cresselia Lv. X). My main issue with your wording to call it “incorrect” is the “in play” part. That part is unnecessary, because you can’t move a damage counter to a Pokémon that’s not in play. (-2 points)

Creativity/Originality: 16/20
I love well executed VG concepts put into the TCG. Most existing Retreat Cost altering effects only increase or decrease, but this puts the game in a unique state, just like the VGC attack does, where the big beefy bois can move but everyone else is struggling. However, as I mentioned that there is a Cresselia Lv. X that has the same base Power, that section isn’t as original.


Wording: 6/15
Make sure to proofread! I think you could have caught a few of these errors if you read through it a few more times

Believability/Playability: 12/15
Because I don’t know too much about your custom set, I don’t have too much to nitpick at in terms of Believability. Honestly, I could see all of these effects on a real card. However, I do think that applying this effect after all other effects might make it particularly strong.

The bigger issue in this category is that the card doesn’t have an explanation for what special rules a Pokémon* has. Every “special” type of card (ex, Lv. X , EX, Prism Star, BREAK, etc.) has had some type of clarifying text on it to explain the special rules it has. It needs to include some mention that it can use the attacks from the card below, because that’s not a normal thing Pokémon can do.


Total: 34/50

Spoiler: Vom’s Empoleon

[Stage 2] Empoleon HP160 [W]
Evolves from Prinplup

NO. 395 Emperor Pokémon HT: 5'07''WT: 186.3 lbs.

Ability: Monarch's Sovereignty
All of your Pokémon that have Piplup, Prinplup, or Empoleon in their name can use the attacks of any Pokémon with Piplup, Prinplup, or Empoleon in its name in play or in your discard pile. (You still need the necessary Energy to use each attack.)

[W][W][W] Falling Guillotine 130+
You may search your discard pile for a [W] Pokémon and put it onto your Bench. If you do, and if any of your Pokémon were Knocked Out by damage from an attack from your opponent's Pokémon with a Rule Box (Pokémon V, Pokémon-GX, etc. have Rule Boxes) during their last turn, this attack does 130 more damage.

Weakness: [L] x2
Resistance: -
Retreat: [C][C]
It avoids unnecessary disputes, but it will decimate anything that threatens its pride.

Wording Errors:
-You may search your discard pile for a [W] Pokémon and put it onto your Bench. You don’t have to search your discard pile - it’s public knowledge. This wording was phased out after the HGSS era. (-2 points)
Phantump RCL’s Dark Guidance “Put a Basic Pokémon from your discard pile onto your Bench.”

Creativity/Originality: 16/20
The design fits in with how Empoleon has been used in the TCG, but it’s got it’s own flavor to it. I do have to say that it’s interesting how there are two Empoleon entries in the contest that each have an effect that bring [W] Pokémon back from the discard. However, while the combination of effects is new, none of them are bringing in anything never-before-seen.

Wording: 13/15

Believability/Playability: 15/15
Very believable. The attack has great power behind it, and also has the ability to put a Stage 2 into play without evolving. Very cool. Would it make Stage 2’s relevant? Probably not, but it is reasonably matched to the existing Stage 2s out there.
Total: 44/50

Spoiler: TheFlyingPidove’s Chingling

Chingling – Psychic – HP30
Basic

Ability: Calming Bell
If you took this Pokémon as a face-down Prize card during your turn and your Bench isn't full, before you put it into your hand, you may put it onto your Bench and heal all damage from your Active Pokémon.

[P] Obnoxious Screech
Have your opponent discard a card from their hand. If this Pokémon has any damage counters on it, have them discard 3 cards instead of 1 from their hand.

Weakness: Psychic (x2)
Resistance:
Retreat: [C]
By emitting its ringing sound, a Chingling at Jubilife City's trainer school kept tricking kids into thinking their class was over.

Wording Errors:
-”Have your opponent discard a card from their hand” should read “Your opponent discards a card from their hand.” Have should only come before this in a case where you may have your opponent do something (Obstagoon CPA), this should look more like Pangoro TEU. (-2 points)
-Missing Dex Info (-1 point)

Creativity/Originality: 15/20
You’ve used a lot of cool concepts that relate well to the lore of Chingling to create a card that I’d really like to use. However, it does have some negative synergy where its attack wants to be a part of a control deck and its ability wants to be in a tanky attacking deck. Also, none of the ideas are anything new, just the combinations are new.

Wording: 12/15
Pretty solid wording.

Believability/Playability: 15/15
Definitely a realistic SM-era card.

Total: 42/50

Spoiler: bbb888’s Mismagius

Mismagius - Psychic - HP 90
Stage 1 - Evolves from Misdreavus

NO. 429 Magical Pokémon HT: 2'11" WT: 9.7 lbs.

[.] Spiteful Gain
Flip a coin. If heads, search your opponent's deck for a Supporter card and discard it. Shuffle your opponent's deck afterward. Then, use the effect of that card as the effect of this attack.

[D] Thief 20
Search your opponent's discard pile for a Supporter card and put it into your hand. Return that card to your opponent's discard pile at the end of your next turn.

[P][C] Night of the Living Ghouls 30+
If you use this attack between 8:00 PM and 4:00 AM UTC, this attack does 30 damage plus 70 more damage.

Weakness: Darkness (+20)
Resistance: Colorless (-20)
Retreat: [C]
Its cries sound like incantations. Those hearing it are tormented by headaches and hallucinations.

Wording Errors:
-Because you are dabbling in some slightly new mechanics with taking your opponents cards (which is ok but often confusing rules wise), I think there needs to be a clarifying clause at the end of the Thief attack. Since it is your opponent’s card, and because there are card effects in Pokémon that discard opponents cards or shuffle your opponent’s hand into the deck, Thief should mention that if the card you took is removed from your hand, it is sent back to your opponent’s discard instead of into your deck, because the contents of decks are not public information. (-3 points)

Creativity/Originality: 17/20
Solid all-around as far as creativity is concerned. Takes existing TCG ideas to the next level in an appropriate way that is thematic for the first two attacks. The third is super creative as well, but we’ll get to its issues later.

Wording: 12/15

Believability/Playability: 4/15
Yeah… This one is unfortunately in a very awkward state for believability. There’s really no way that Pokémon would print a card that is reliant on time of day for an effect. The same issues that arise with Birthday Pikachu and Imakuni’s Doduo that make them not legal for tournaments arise with this card as well; the game really shouldn’t interact with the world around it, for fairness purposes. It wouldn’t be fair if you played against an opponent in a tournament with Misdreavus at 7:30pm, but someone else played against them at 8pm. All of the sudden their deck is better and it’s not because of any gameplay or choices they made.
The good news is, I think that the rest of the card is pretty realistic in terms of balance. Attacks are really good, but flippy, damage and HP are reasonable.

Total: 33/50

Top 3

Spoiler

3rd Place: TheFlyingPidove’s Chingling, with 42/50 points.
2nd Place: Vom’s Empoleon, with 44/50 points.
1st Place: Falling Skies’s Floatzel V, with 46/50 points.

 

[Jabberwock]

Huge thanks to @47bennyg for getting text-based results done so fast! Image results are coming tomorrow — hang tight!

 

[bbb888]

Appreciate Benny's feedback on my card and taking time to judge every entry. I agree with him on some points.
Why can't we create "spoof" cards like Birthday Pikachu or Imakuni's Doduo?? They are real cards. Jabberwock's rules say nothing about being tournament legal, just that the card needs to be real.

 

[47bennyg]

Appreciate Benny's feedback on my card and taking time to judge every entry. I agree with him on some points.
Why can't we create "spoof" cards like Birthday Pikachu or Imakuni's Doduo?? They are real cards. Jabberwock's rules say nothing about being tournament legal, just that the card needs to be real.

While I personally don't have a problem with spoof cards within reason (especially check out today's contest!), cards like Imakuni's Doduo and Birthday Pikachu are pretty clearly made to be a spoof - and Doduo also comes with text that says that they aren't tournament legal (so do more recent Japanese prints of the Pikachu, but the original Pikachu just immediately received a ban by Wizards of the Coast). In my judging of yours I took into account that the rest of the card acts like a tournament legal card and was designed and balanced to work in a real game, but then has a very unrealistic attack. The disconnect between the two ideas is not good for its believability.

 

[bbb888]

While I personally don't have a problem with spoof cards within reason (especially check out today's contest!), cards like Imakuni's Doduo and Birthday Pikachu are pretty clearly made to be a spoof - and Doduo also comes with text that says that they aren't tournament legal (so do more recent Japanese prints of the Pikachu, but the original Pikachu just immediately received a ban by Wizards of the Coast). In my judging of yours I took into account that the rest of the card acts like a tournament legal card and was designed and balanced to work in a real game, but then has a very unrealistic attack. The disconnect between the two ideas is not good for its believability.

OK, I see. Thanks for explaining

 

[47bennyg]

Also @bbb888 I totally just remembered that I wanted to include a reference to Team Flare Hyper Gear as a starting point for a reference for your Thief attack and stealing opponents cards. It's not totally the same, but it's a similar enough situation I think that can help you craft a hypothetical clarification for your card.

 

[FireLizard]

Text-Based Results

Spoiler: Anime Psyclone’s Corrin (Male)’s Garchomp EX

Wording Errors:
-Evolves from Corrin♂'s Gabite (to be consistent with other owner’s Pokémon in the past in TCG). (-1 point)
-[N][N][F][C] Your energy symbol notation totally makes sense, but for the future, here are the more standardized ones. I’m not sure where to actual find a resource that points to these as the standard, but here they are: [G] Grass [R] Fire [W] Water [L] Lightning [F] Fighting [P] Psychic [D] Darkness [M] Metal [N] Dragon [Y] Fairy [C] Colorless (-0 points)
-”This attack does 10 damage plus double the amount of heads.” Unclear wording. If I take it at face value, if I flip two heads, this would do 14 damage total (which isn’t something that happens in the Pokémon TCG). (-3 points)
-Missing Pokédex info and flavor text. (-1 point)
-Your ability refers to both damage counters and damage, which are two different things. Also with each type of energy listed, the wording should be consistent each time. (-3 points)
Here’s a sample of how it might look:

Whenever your opponent puts damage counters on this Pokémon, you may discard as many Energy cards attached to this Pokémon as you like. For every [N] Energy card discarded, reduce the amount of damage counters by 3. For every [F] Energy card discarded, reduce the amount of damage counters by 2. For any other type of Energy card, reduce the amount of damage counters by 1. The amount of damage counters cannot be reduced to under 1.

Creativity/Originality: 16/20
The Fire Emblem crossover is nice, and I think Garchomp is probably the best dragon that fits with the aesthetic of the FE. The ability also encourages good gameplay decisions: how many energy can I afford to discard? Do I just discard them all and erase the hit? Do I just discard one so I can still attack next turn. Very nice.

Wording: 6/15
Biggest way to grow in this section is to clarify what that attack does.

Believability/Playability: 5/15
HP is a little low for an EX, also the evolution mechanic is more consistent with a Pokémon-ex or GX rather than EX (which were all Basics). Weakness and Resistance were not x3 and -10 during the EX era. In terms of playability, it seems very reasonable, but gated by high energy costs, but ultimately I’m not sure because I’m not sure what the attack is supposed to do. Also, although Dragon has been used as a type in the TCG, it has never been used as an energy cost, as there have never been energy cards that provide dragon type energy. Usually dragons have a combination of two or more other types of energy in their cost, Garchomp specifically usually being [W] and [F], but more recently it has just been [F].

Total: 28/50

Spoiler: DashKing’s Empoleon

Wording Errors:
-Continual Whirlwind needs a clause similar to Bunnelby PCL’s Ancient Trait: (If the first attack Knocks Out your opponent’s Active Pokémon, you may attack again after your opponent chooses a new Active Pokémon.) (-2 points)
-In your post, you reference that Emperor’s Mandate “maxes at 200 with four Empoleon in play without ‘Emperor’s Mandate.’” However, the way it is written, there is nothing that limits the damage except for discarding cards. If you have 2 Empoleon, you can switch back and forth between them and hit numbers like 350 or 400 as long as you discard 7 or 8 cards. If you want it to match the intended effect you put in your write-up, you need more clarifying text, probably something to the effect that each Empoleon can only use Continual Whirlwind once per turn. (-3 points)

Creativity/Originality: 17/20
While it is a little coincidental that there are two Empoleon entries that bring back Pokémon from the discard, overall the design of the card is well enough related to Empoleons of the past, while still carving its own niche. Continual Whirlwind is very unique in the Pokémon TCG as well.

Wording: 10/15

Believability/Playability: 9/15
While I think the skeleton of this card is pretty believable, I don’t necessarily find this amount of damage output for no Energy to be realistic. There are plenty of powerful draw cards in the game that can take advantage of this (Professor’s Research, Zebstrika LOT, Colress, etc.) and make it powerful because you could run this in a deck with 0 energy. I feel like some of the more powerful aspects of this card should be gated by more costs. Additionally, Sword/Shield era cards with an ability only have 1 attack.

Total: 36/50

Spoiler: FireLizard’s Honchkrow

Wording Errors:
-have no weakness instead of has (-1 point)
-é instead of è in Pokémon (-1 point)
-”You can't apply more than 1 Count of the Darkness Ability at a time” (-2 points)
-Aegislash RCL “You can’t apply more than 1 Big Shield Ability at a time.”
-Missing spaces between punctuation and words (-1 point)
-”If your opponent has any Pokémon V or Pokémon-GX in play” (-2 points)
-Lycanroc CEC “If your opponent has any Pokémon-GX or Pokémon-EX
in play”
-The “either case” doesn’t have any precedent, and there is existing syntax that fits with what you are doing (-2 points)
-Electrode VIV “If you searched your deck in this way, this Pokémon is Knocked Out.”
-”If you put a Pokémon on your Bench in this way, attach a [D] Energy from your hand to that Pokémon.”
-Resistance is -30 in the Sword and Shield era. (-1 point)

Creativity/Originality: 16/20
You’ve designed a solid support mon here that explores some good ideas, but it’s not necessarily anything groundbreaking. All the abilities that this Honchkrow has, have been seen before in the game, but combining them onto an ultimate supporter is cool.

Wording: 5/15
You can make up a lot of ground in this section next time just by cleaning up a few small things.

Believability/Playability: 13/15
This card is good, but the attack is a little redundant in its use in today’s game. You mentioned a synergy with Eternatus VMax, and I can see that in the ability, but I don’t think that in the current standard meta it would be used to get Eternatus VMaxes onto the bench. You have to get an Evolution Pokémon in play and attach an energy to it to get the effect of adding a better evolution card to your bench. Why wouldn’t you just get the better evolution in the first place?

Total: 34/50

Spoiler: Falling Skies’s Floatzel V

Wording Errors:
-The wording looks very clean, and is consistent with other cards that have similar effects. However, I am taking off points because I think it needs just a little bit more clarification about its unlimited attachments.

Currently, the wording for normal tools is “Attach a Pokémon Tool to 1 of your Pokémon that doesn’t already have a Pokémon Tool attached.” With this wording, I would assume that you can first attach a normal tool card before attaching any Basic Pokémon (because you can have any number of those), but if you attached a Basic Pokémon first, you couldn’t attach a normal tool afterward (because those can only be attached if there isn’t one attached). I’m not sure if this is an intended loophole or not - but because it can only be done one way and not the other it feels like a loophole, which makes me think that you need text to clarify it in case of questions. Maybe just something like “This Pokémon may have any number of Pokémon attached to it as Pokémon Tool cards and/or 1 Pokémon Tool attached to it” (-3 points)

Creativity/Originality: 20/20
Lots of great things to say about the originality of this card. The attack and ability are very tied to the lore of Floatzel, which is awesome. Both the attack and ability are new and unique which is awesome. When I read this card at first I was picturing how I would put together a deck for it - which is definitely the kind of thoughts you want to inspire!

Wording: 12/15
Just the tool loophole to clarify here.

Believability/Playability: 14/15
I think the biggest weakness of this card is the difference between the possibilities for it in Expanded and Standard. It is very underpowered in an environment without Klefki STS and Shedinja LOT, which you admitted in your write-up. Pokémon in general doesn’t balance new things for the Expanded format - that’s why there is a ban list for it - so it seems less believable that this card would be printed over one that had its damage output actually scaled for Standard format. Maybe the damage is tweaked if one of those Pokémon attached had a Rule Box?

Total: 46/50

Spoiler: Kangaflora’s Magnezone

Wording Errors:
-None that I can see.

Creativity/Originality: 5/20
This is where this card struggles the most. There has already been a Magnezone with the same attack and the same effect (Magnezone FLI & UPR) and one with a dual type ability (Magnezone UNM, although that one works just while it is in play). The most creative thing on this card is the ability name, which I quite like

Wording: 15/15

Believability/Playability: 14/15
Very realistic, considering we have current cards with near identical abilities in the format (Blaziken DAA, Gallade CEC, and Magnezone UNM). However, all Sword and Shield era cards with Abilities (so far) have only one attack, so minus one for that on the realism scale.

Total: 34/50

Spoiler: All-Stars_Creator’s Cresselia*

You mentioned Stormfront era as a power level, so I’ll use that as well to inform my ruling.

Wording Errors:
-Lv. X wording is "put onto" if you want to follow that, it’s just more succinct, but yours isn’t technically wrong (-0 points)
-Gravity Trick Room and Moon Reflection (-1 point)
-When a specific retreat cost is mentioned, Pokémon has used a number (or “no Retreat Cost” for 0, starting in the BW era). When retreat costs are modified by addition or subtraction, energy symbols are used. Float Stone PLF and Air Balloon SWSH are a good example of the difference. Your Trait sets retreats to a specific number, so numbers should be used. (-2 points)
-Capitalize Retreat Cost (-1 point)
-You have two different names for your Trait (-1 point)
-”you may move 1 damage counter from 1 Pokémon to another Pokémon.” I’ve included the most recent syntax for this type of effect, but there are multiple different ways that it has been formatted in the past (including on a Cresselia Lv. X). My main issue with your wording to call it “incorrect” is the “in play” part. That part is unnecessary, because you can’t move a damage counter to a Pokémon that’s not in play. (-2 points)

Creativity/Originality: 16/20
I love well executed VG concepts put into the TCG. Most existing Retreat Cost altering effects only increase or decrease, but this puts the game in a unique state, just like the VGC attack does, where the big beefy bois can move but everyone else is struggling. However, as I mentioned that there is a Cresselia Lv. X that has the same base Power, that section isn’t as original.


Wording: 6/15
Make sure to proofread! I think you could have caught a few of these errors if you read through it a few more times

Believability/Playability: 12/15
Because I don’t know too much about your custom set, I don’t have too much to nitpick at in terms of Believability. Honestly, I could see all of these effects on a real card. However, I do think that applying this effect after all other effects might make it particularly strong.

The bigger issue in this category is that the card doesn’t have an explanation for what special rules a Pokémon* has. Every “special” type of card (ex, Lv. X , EX, Prism Star, BREAK, etc.) has had some type of clarifying text on it to explain the special rules it has. It needs to include some mention that it can use the attacks from the card below, because that’s not a normal thing Pokémon can do.


Total: 34/50

Spoiler: Vom’s Empoleon

Wording Errors:
-You may search your discard pile for a [W] Pokémon and put it onto your Bench. You don’t have to search your discard pile - it’s public knowledge. This wording was phased out after the HGSS era. (-2 points)
Phantump RCL’s Dark Guidance “Put a Basic Pokémon from your discard pile onto your Bench.”

Creativity/Originality: 16/20
The design fits in with how Empoleon has been used in the TCG, but it’s got it’s own flavor to it. I do have to say that it’s interesting how there are two Empoleon entries in the contest that each have an effect that bring [W] Pokémon back from the discard. However, while the combination of effects is new, none of them are bringing in anything never-before-seen.

Wording: 13/15

Believability/Playability: 15/15
Very believable. The attack has great power behind it, and also has the ability to put a Stage 2 into play without evolving. Very cool. Would it make Stage 2’s relevant? Probably not, but it is reasonably matched to the existing Stage 2s out there.
Total: 44/50

Spoiler: TheFlyingPidove’s Chingling

Wording Errors:
-”Have your opponent discard a card from their hand” should read “Your opponent discards a card from their hand.” Have should only come before this in a case where you may have your opponent do something (Obstagoon CPA), this should look more like Pangoro TEU. (-2 points)
-Missing Dex Info (-1 point)

Creativity/Originality: 15/20
You’ve used a lot of cool concepts that relate well to the lore of Chingling to create a card that I’d really like to use. However, it does have some negative synergy where its attack wants to be a part of a control deck and its ability wants to be in a tanky attacking deck. Also, none of the ideas are anything new, just the combinations are new.

Wording: 12/15
Pretty solid wording.

Believability/Playability: 15/15
Definitely a realistic SM-era card.

Total: 42/50

Spoiler: bbb888’s Mismagius

Wording Errors:
-Because you are dabbling in some slightly new mechanics with taking your opponents cards (which is ok but often confusing rules wise), I think there needs to be a clarifying clause at the end of the Thief attack. Since it is your opponent’s card, and because there are card effects in Pokémon that discard opponents cards or shuffle your opponent’s hand into the deck, Thief should mention that if the card you took is removed from your hand, it is sent back to your opponent’s discard instead of into your deck, because the contents of decks are not public information. (-3 points)

Creativity/Originality: 17/20
Solid all-around as far as creativity is concerned. Takes existing TCG ideas to the next level in an appropriate way that is thematic for the first two attacks. The third is super creative as well, but we’ll get to its issues later.

Wording: 12/15

Believability/Playability: 4/15
Yeah… This one is unfortunately in a very awkward state for believability. There’s really no way that Pokémon would print a card that is reliant on time of day for an effect. The same issues that arise with Birthday Pikachu and Imakuni’s Doduo that make them not legal for tournaments arise with this card as well; the game really shouldn’t interact with the world around it, for fairness purposes. It wouldn’t be fair if you played against an opponent in a tournament with Misdreavus at 7:30pm, but someone else played against them at 8pm. All of the sudden their deck is better and it’s not because of any gameplay or choices they made.
The good news is, I think that the rest of the card is pretty realistic in terms of balance. Attacks are really good, but flippy, damage and HP are reasonable.

Total: 33/50

Top 3

Spoiler

3rd Place: TheFlyingPidove’s Chingling, with 42/50 points.
2nd Place: Vom’s Empoleon, with 44/50 points.
1st Place: Falling Skies’s Floatzel V, with 46/50 points.

Wording isn't my best,but I'm happy that you enjoyed it!

 

[The Ωmega One]

Image-Based Results

Judge: @The Ωmega One

First off, I want to apologize for the delayed results; this was my first time judging and there were a few bumps in the road. That being said, it’s really cool to be able to look over each card in depth and see how they explore the theme. This time around, it seems everyone really knocked it out of the park for fonts/placements with there being only very minor errors — which is awesome because that’s one of the hardest parts of faking. I look forward to judging future CaCs and getting to see what other awesome cards the community makes!

~~The Ωmega One

Spoiler: FourteenAlmonds’s Regigigas FB

An interesting take on Regigigas’s lore of moving the continents. The effects are unique, and the new twist on the milling archetype allows for a really fun win con.

Wording errors:
- Missing “(before your attack)” in power. [-2 points]
- “This attack does 10 more” > “Does 30 damage plus 10 more” [-2 points]
- “their deck” > “his or her deck” [-1 point] (Jabber’s policy is not to dock for this if you mention in your post that it’s intentional. Otherwise it just looks like you mixed up your eras.)
- “power” shouldn’t be capitalized. [-1 point]

Fonts and Placement errors:
- The attack name / power name fonts look like they’re a bit too big. Meta’s font guide has the attack/body/power fonts a few point sizes higher than they should be. [-1 point]

Creativity/Originality: 13/15
(The idea of force-shuffling your opponent’s deck for extra damage is interesting. It feels very dependent on the various resources in the era, but could potentially be a fun control/mill deck.)
Believability/Playability: 15/15
(I could easily see this fitting into the DPPt-HGSS meta. With support from Judge and additional milling tools to help you build up discards, Land Shaper can be really effective.)
Wording: 4/10
(A few small era-specific errors.)
Fonts and Placement: 4/5
(One small font issue.)
Aesthetics: 4/5
(I think the holoseheet could be a bit brighter.)
Total: 40/50

Spoiler: Carl Miller’s Gallade

Nice to see some of the community’s custom blanks being used! Icy really nailed the look of the beta blanks.

Wording errors:
- Flip a coin. If heads, this attack does 50 damage plus 50 more damage [-2 points]

Fonts and Placement errors:
- Everything looks right when looking at Icy’s examples.

Creativity/Originality: 9/15
(Pretty standard flip-for-more-damage effect. Justified is a good nod to its in-game ability, and I like the way it helps cover its own Weakness.)
Believability/Playability: 12/15
(This card could definitely have been printed in the DPPt era (on different blanks, of course), which is where you told me it should go. However, with the damage output hinging massively on a coin flip I don’t see this card having any strong competitive use — in the end it’s just not really playable.)
Wording: 8/10
(Very minor error in damage-boosting wording.)
Fonts and Placement: 5/5
(Everything looks right.)
Aesthetics: 4/5
(The holo effect is nice. The art is a bit jarring on beta blanks, though — the Classic era used a lot of watercolor art, which ishmam’s definitely isn’t.)
Total: 38/50

Spoiler: Alolan Teddiursa’s Light Torterra

It's nice seeing some lesser-used eras/blanks in the CaC. I like seeing custom Light Pokémon — it was a very short-lived gimmick.

Wording errors:
- “one” should be “1” in power [-1 point]
- “of if Light Torterra” > “or if” in Power [-1 point]
- “If Light Torterra has any [F] energy cards attached” > “If there are any [F] Energy cards attached to Light Torterra,” (Dark Houndoom (Neo Destiny N4 7)) [-2 points]
- “then flip a coin, if heads,” > “then flip a coin. If heads,” (Dark Ariados (Neo Destiny N4 17)) [-1 point]
- “before you attack” > “before your attack” [-1 point]
- “Energy” should be capitalized. [-1 point]
- “per turn” > “each turn” [-1 point]

Fonts and Placement errors:
- Looks solid.

Creativity/Originality: 13/15
(Looks like a really solid recovery card with lots of good support. It lets you never worry about running out of Energy, and win Stadium wars. Well-fleshed-out for what it does)
Believability/Playability: 14/15
(The HP could be bumped up a bit. Light Dragonair has 80; Light Torterra could easily have 100. The potential for support would make this an easy choice in the Neo era, though.)
Wording: 2/10
(A few small syntax errors.)
Fonts and Placement: 5/5
(Everything is where it should be.)
Aesthetics: 4/5
(The art is perfect for a Light Pokémon! The only issues are that the evo icons from base-HGSS used stock art, not the 3D icons, and that the blank seems really blurry.)
Total: 38/50

Spoiler: PMJ’s Glaceon

For sure thought there would be more Glaceon cards popping up this round. I really hope that you do keep the Body in a Lackey set; it seems like it would be fun to use.

Wording errors:
- Missing “face-down” when looking at Prize cards; see Azelf LA. [-2 point]
- Not sure if you should use Entei SW for the Body wording since you do have a sniping effect. I think for balancing with a blanket snipe, though, it’s fine that you don’t get to see Prizes for Bench KOs. [-0 points]

Fonts and Placement errors:
- Everything is correct — as it should be, since you’re using my font guide I think

Creativity/Originality: 15/15
(Really digging the Body. The attack is really worthwhile for its useful secondary effects.)
Believability/Playability: 15/15
(Glaceon could easily find a home in DPPt or Lackey DPPt, and be a viable attacker there without being BDIF.)
Wording: 8/10
(Missing a small clause.)
Fonts and Placement: 5/5
(Looking good.)
Aesthetics: 4/5
(The holosheet is on point, but you missed cutting the top right corner. Also, DPPt used stock 2D art for evo icons — BW is when it switched to the 3D icons.)
Total: 47/50

Spoiler: Nemes’s Spiritomb

Dude, I love what you’ve done with the callbacks to the Arceus Spiritomb! The visuals are amazing. It’s unfortunate nothing like this would make it to the official TCG.

Wording errors:
- None, well done.

Fonts and Placement errors:
- There’s a 60HP under the 70 HP of the card; looks like it’s from the ripped reverse foil. [-1 point]

Creativity/Originality: 15/15
(The attack alone is what pushed this score so high. It seems really straightforward: you Item lock, then use that to dump your opponent’s discard into the Lost Zone. However, there seems to be a lot of different ways to take advantage of it — dumping cards you can’t recover for the extra damage, tossing Lost March mons (or some similar archetype), and so on. My favorite would be discarding a Spiritomb to shut off the Zeitgeist effect for yourself, and Lost Zoning it with the attack to put the lock back up just in time for your opponent’s turn.)
Believability/Playability: 15/15
(If fun gimmicks still existed, I could see this card existing officially. Using it would require some skill in finding what pairs well with it, managing resources to both do damage and ensure you’re hitting for enough damage while still keeping the lock.)
Wording: 10/10
(Everything is perfect.)
Fonts and Placement: 4/5
(You’ve nailed the fonts and font spacings for two different eras — which is impressive to see on the same card.)
Aesthetics: 4.5/5
(Not sure if it’s a design choice for the reverse holosheet to not go into the Zeitgeist box. That part of the card looks a bit out of place being non-holo.)
Total: 48.5/50

Spoiler: AlphaLad’s Porygon-Z +

Like the Plus gimmick! Basically, it’s a LV.X that functions like a BREAK. Kinda neat to see someone take the idea in a different direction — I did something similar, but it turned Pokémon into Tag Teams.

Wording errors:
- With the Ability, if you wanted to force the user to attach all basic Energy in their hand, you’d need to add a clause to reveal their hand (to prove to the opponent they don’t have any more Energy they’re hiding). If you just wanted to be able to attach as many basic Energy as you wanted per turn you’d use “As often as you like during your turn, you may attach a basic Energy card from your hand to 1 of your Pokémon” [-2 points]
- “This Pokémon can’t use” > “During your next turn, this Pokémon can’t use” [-2 points]
- “Abilities” should be capitalized in the Plus rule. [-1 point]

Fonts and Placement errors:
- Your blanks, your rules. That being said, everything seems consistent with official cards.

Creativity/Originality: 13/15
(The effects are very synergetic, letting you recover from whipping the Actives of all Energy. The potential for using this with any Porygon-Z base is really good, and I could see it with either an offensive or a defensive strategy. Overall, the card feels very reminiscent of past Porygon-Z cards.
Believability/Playability: 15/15
(In the hands of the right players, would be a very useful card with the right base Porygon-Z.)
Wording: 6/10
(A couple of era-specific errors.)
Fonts and Placement: 5/5
(Custom blanks, your rules. Everything is well set up and matches traditions set by official blanks.)
Aesthetics: 4/5
(I would love to see a holosheet on the card. I feel like this kind of card/gimmick should have a holosheet.)
Total: 43/50

Spoiler: ggDerpyDerp’s Vespiquen LV.X

Honestly, I’m surprised Vespiquen didn’t get a LV.X in DPPt. It was a Pokémon that showcased a minor gimmick of the games, the Honey trees, so you’d think it would’ve gotten a bit more attention.

Wording errors:
- “If all of your Pokémon in play are [G] type” > “If all of your Pokémon in play are [G] Pokémon”. In DPPt the word “type” is used when something’s type is being changed or in cases where there isn’t a specific targeted color [see Arceus LVX, Spinda (SV 46)], and says (type symbol) Pokémon when there’s a specific type targeted. See Dewgong (SV 24), Dawn Stadium (MD 79). [-2 points]
- "the number of Benched Pokémon you can have is now 8" -> "you can have 8 Benched Pokémon" (Giant Stump, Sky Field) [-2 points]
- "You can't put Pokémon (except for [G] Pokémon) into play" [-2 point(s)]

Fonts and Placement errors:
- Everything is looking good.

Creativity/Originality: 11/15
(The Body and Power are useful support effects we’ve seen in the past. Bench expanding is becoming more common.)
Believability/Playability: 15/15
(Both effects lend themselves to making a very consistent [G] deck. Mother Hive could be really fun with any effects that do more based on how many Benched Pokémon you have.)
Wording: 4/10
(Some era-specific errors.)
Fonts and Placement: 10/10
(Everything is on point.)
Aesthetics: 2/5
(I like the bees you have swarming around Vespiquen, but the art is lacking the 3D-like visuals traditionally seen with LV.X cards. Also, the way Vespiquen is coming out of the box has some issues — while it is normal for LV.X art to come out of the illus box, the art should not extend into the effect names or into the evo bar.)
Total: 42/50

Spoiler: 47bennyg’s Magnezone-GX

Nice to see Omnium continue to make its way around the community. Magnezone’s Ability leads to some interesting combinations, especially when you delve into the realm of Expanded. I like the idea of running a few tech stadiums that can disrupt top decks in the meta.

Wording errors:
- You’re allowed to say “non-[M]” in SM-on, rather than listing every other type. [-2 points]
- I’m not sure if “applied to” is correct, but I couldn’t find anything different, so it slides. [-0 point(s)]

Fonts and Placement errors:
- Custom blanks, your rules. However, everything lines up with stuff I’ve seen from Pone.

Creativity/Originality: 13/15
(The ability and GX attack are both quite unique and make for a really useful support mon. There’s not much synergy going on, though, and I would have liked to have seen more from the non-GX attack.)
Believability/Playability: 12/15
(While I really like the card and feel like the effects are cool, I do think it could lead to a BDIF situation. It allows any typed support to be used by [M] Pokémon, effectively prioritizing [M] above those other types. A few particularly useful examples are Dark City (UNM 193), Martial Arts Dojo (UNB 179), and Black Market Prism Star. (TEU 134).)
Wording: 8/10
(See above.)
Fonts and Placement: 5/5
(Custom blank, but everything looks correct for Omnium.)
Aesthetics: 4/5
(I feel like the holosheet needs to be brighter — at first glance, I thought the card was a non-holo.)
Total: 42/50

Spoiler: Fariszk7’s Spiritomb LV.X

Interesting that Spiritomb is the only Pokémon we saw twice. I like the running theme of Ghost-type Pokémon LV.X dying, only to affect the game post-mortem — brings Dusknoir LV.X to mind.

Wording errors:
- “(You still need the necessary Energy to use each attack.)” needs to be italicized. [-1 point]
-LV.X > LV.X (i.e. italicized) [-0.5 point]
- Per Garchomp LV.X, the power should send it to the opponent’s Bench “as a Basic Pokémon”. You also need at least one more clause to clarify ownership while Spiritomb is on your opponent’s Bench — who gets Prize cards when it’s Knocked Out? [-3 points]

Fonts and Placement errors:
- The Body and Power names are just a bit too big — if you’re using Meta’s font guide, those layers are a few point sizes off. [-1 point]

Creativity/Originality: 15/15
(The main part of this card is Eternal Malediction, and it’s an interesting effect with a few different uses. You could use it to clog your opponent’s Bench, use it to stall for spread damage, or use it as a shield — since your opponent often won’t want the power to activate.)
Believability/Playability: 12/15
(This card is really hard to place in the DPPt meta. Assuming when it’s on your opponent’s Bench it functions like their Pokémon and you’d take Prizes for a Knock Out, you could use it to soften their mons and then, when you Knock it Out, you get back the Prize you gave up to trigger the effect. The effect itself is something I don’t see making it to official cards, though, given how hard it is to keep track of. There’s been very few cards that you play to your opponent’s side of the field.)
Wording: 5.5/10
(A couple errors and a missing clause.)
Fonts and Placement: 4/5
(Minor font size thing.)
Aesthetics: 4.5/5
(The art and holosheet look good, but I have a minor issue with the way the stage bar goes over Spiritomb. It looks a little awkward.)
Total: 41/50

Spoiler: Top 3

3rd Place: AlphaLad's Porygon-Z +, with 43/50 points.
2nd Place: PMJ’s Glaceon, with 47/50 points.
1st Place: Nemes’s Spiritomb, with 48.5/50 points.

 

[Alolan Teddiursa]

Image-Based Results

Judge: @The Ωmega One

First off, I want to apologize for the delayed results; this was my first time judging and there were a few bumps in the road. That being said, it’s really cool to be able to look over each card in depth and see how they explore the theme. This time around, it seems everyone really knocked it out of the park for fonts/placements with there being only very minor errors — which is awesome because that’s one of the hardest parts of faking. I look forward to judging future CaCs and getting to see what other awesome cards the community makes!

~~The Ωmega One

Spoiler: FourteenAlmonds’s Regigigas FB

An interesting take on Regigigas’s lore of moving the continents. The effects are unique, and the new twist on the milling archetype allows for a really fun win con.

Wording errors:
- Missing “(before your attack)” in power. [-2 points]
- “This attack does 10 more” > “Does 30 damage plus 10 more” [-2 points]
- “their deck” > “his or her deck” [-1 point] (Jabber’s policy is not to dock for this if you mention in your post that it’s intentional. Otherwise it just looks like you mixed up your eras.)
- “power” shouldn’t be capitalized. [-1 point]

Fonts and Placement errors:
- The attack name / power name fonts look like they’re a bit too big. Meta’s font guide has the attack/body/power fonts a few point sizes higher than they should be. [-1 point]

Creativity/Originality: 13/15
(The idea of force-shuffling your opponent’s deck for extra damage is interesting. It feels very dependent on the various resources in the era, but could potentially be a fun control/mill deck.)
Believability/Playability: 15/15
(I could easily see this fitting into the DPPt-HGSS meta. With support from Judge and additional milling tools to help you build up discards, Land Shaper can be really effective.)
Wording: 4/10
(A few small era-specific errors.)
Fonts and Placement: 4/5
(One small font issue.)
Aesthetics: 4/5
(I think the holoseheet could be a bit brighter.)
Total: 40/50

Spoiler: Carl Miller’s Gallade

Nice to see some of the community’s custom blanks being used! Icy really nailed the look of the beta blanks.

Wording errors:
- Flip a coin. If heads, this attack does 50 damage plus 50 more damage [-2 points]

Fonts and Placement errors:
- Everything looks right when looking at Icy’s examples.

Creativity/Originality: 9/15
(Pretty standard flip-for-more-damage effect. Justified is a good nod to its in-game ability, and I like the way it helps cover its own Weakness.)
Believability/Playability: 12/15
(This card could definitely have been printed in the DPPt era (on different blanks, of course), which is where you told me it should go. However, with the damage output hinging massively on a coin flip I don’t see this card having any strong competitive use — in the end it’s just not really playable.)
Wording: 8/10
(Very minor error in damage-boosting wording.)
Fonts and Placement: 5/5
(Everything looks right.)
Aesthetics: 4/5
(The holo effect is nice. The art is a bit jarring on beta blanks, though — the Classic era used a lot of watercolor art, which ishmam’s definitely isn’t.)
Total: 38/50

Spoiler: Alolan Teddiursa’s Light Torterra

It's nice seeing some lesser-used eras/blanks in the CaC. I like seeing custom Light Pokémon — it was a very short-lived gimmick.

Wording errors:
- “one” should be “1” in power [-1 point]
- “of if Light Torterra” > “or if” in Power [-1 point]
- “If Light Torterra has any [F] energy cards attached” > “If there are any [F] Energy cards attached to Light Torterra,” (Dark Houndoom (Neo Destiny N4 7)) [-2 points]
- “then flip a coin, if heads,” > “then flip a coin. If heads,” (Dark Ariados (Neo Destiny N4 17)) [-1 point]
- “before you attack” > “before your attack” [-1 point]
- “Energy” should be capitalized. [-1 point]
- “per turn” > “each turn” [-1 point]

Fonts and Placement errors:
- Looks solid.

Creativity/Originality: 13/15
(Looks like a really solid recovery card with lots of good support. It lets you never worry about running out of Energy, and win Stadium wars. Well-fleshed-out for what it does)
Believability/Playability: 14/15
(The HP could be bumped up a bit. Light Dragonair has 80; Light Torterra could easily have 100. The potential for support would make this an easy choice in the Neo era, though.)
Wording: 2/10
(A few small syntax errors.)
Fonts and Placement: 5/5
(Everything is where it should be.)
Aesthetics: 4/5
(The art is perfect for a Light Pokémon! The only issues are that the evo icons from base-HGSS used stock art, not the 3D icons, and that the blank seems really blurry.)
Total: 38/50

Spoiler: PMJ’s Glaceon

For sure thought there would be more Glaceon cards popping up this round. I really hope that you do keep the Body in a Lackey set; it seems like it would be fun to use.

Wording errors:
- Missing “face-down” when looking at Prize cards; see Azelf LA. [-2 point]
- Not sure if you should use Entei SW for the Body wording since you do have a sniping effect. I think for balancing with a blanket snipe, though, it’s fine that you don’t get to see Prizes for Bench KOs. [-0 points]

Fonts and Placement errors:
- Everything is correct — as it should be, since you’re using my font guide I think

Creativity/Originality: 15/15
(Really digging the Body. The attack is really worthwhile for its useful secondary effects.)
Believability/Playability: 15/15
(Glaceon could easily find a home in DPPt or Lackey DPPt, and be a viable attacker there without being BDIF.)
Wording: 8/10
(Missing a small clause.)
Fonts and Placement: 5/5
(Looking good.)
Aesthetics: 4/5
(The holosheet is on point, but you missed cutting the top right corner. Also, DPPt used stock 2D art for evo icons — BW is when it switched to the 3D icons.)
Total: 47/50

Spoiler: Nemes’s Spiritomb

Dude, I love what you’ve done with the callbacks to the Arceus Spiritomb! The visuals are amazing. It’s unfortunate nothing like this would make it to the official TCG.

Wording errors:
- None, well done.

Fonts and Placement errors:
- There’s a 60HP under the 70 HP of the card; looks like it’s from the ripped reverse foil. [-1 point]

Creativity/Originality: 15/15
(The attack alone is what pushed this score so high. It seems really straightforward: you Item lock, then use that to dump your opponent’s discard into the Lost Zone. However, there seems to be a lot of different ways to take advantage of it — dumping cards you can’t recover for the extra damage, tossing Lost March mons (or some similar archetype), and so on. My favorite would be discarding a Spiritomb to shut off the Zeitgeist effect for yourself, and Lost Zoning it with the attack to put the lock back up just in time for your opponent’s turn.)
Believability/Playability: 15/15
(If fun gimmicks still existed, I could see this card existing officially. Using it would require some skill in finding what pairs well with it, managing resources to both do damage and ensure you’re hitting for enough damage while still keeping the lock.)
Wording: 10/10
(Everything is perfect.)
Fonts and Placement: 4/5
(You’ve nailed the fonts and font spacings for two different eras — which is impressive to see on the same card.)
Aesthetics: 4.5/5
(Not sure if it’s a design choice for the reverse holosheet to not go into the Zeitgeist box. That part of the card looks a bit out of place being non-holo.)
Total: 48.5/50

Spoiler: AlphaLad’s Porygon-Z +

Like the Plus gimmick! Basically, it’s a LV.X that functions like a BREAK. Kinda neat to see someone take the idea in a different direction — I did something similar, but it turned Pokémon into Tag Teams.

Wording errors:
- With the Ability, if you wanted to force the user to attach all basic Energy in their hand, you’d need to add a clause to reveal their hand (to prove to the opponent they don’t have any more Energy they’re hiding). If you just wanted to be able to attach as many basic Energy as you wanted per turn you’d use “As often as you like during your turn, you may attach a basic Energy card from your hand to 1 of your Pokémon” [-2 points]
- “This Pokémon can’t use” > “During your next turn, this Pokémon can’t use” [-2 points]
- “Abilities” should be capitalized in the Plus rule. [-1 point]

Fonts and Placement errors:
- Your blanks, your rules. That being said, everything seems consistent with official cards.

Creativity/Originality: 13/15
(The effects are very synergetic, letting you recover from whipping the Actives of all Energy. The potential for using this with any Porygon-Z base is really good, and I could see it with either an offensive or a defensive strategy. Overall, the card feels very reminiscent of past Porygon-Z cards.
Believability/Playability: 15/15
(In the hands of the right players, would be a very useful card with the right base Porygon-Z.)
Wording: 6/10
(A couple of era-specific errors.)
Fonts and Placement: 5/5
(Custom blanks, your rules. Everything is well set up and matches traditions set by official blanks.)
Aesthetics: 4/5
(I would love to see a holosheet on the card. I feel like this kind of card/gimmick should have a holosheet.)
Total: 43/50

Spoiler: ggDerpyDerp’s Vespiquen LV.X

Honestly, I’m surprised Vespiquen didn’t get a LV.X in DPPt. It was a Pokémon that showcased a minor gimmick of the games, the Honey trees, so you’d think it would’ve gotten a bit more attention.

Wording errors:
- “If all of your Pokémon in play are [G] type” > “If all of your Pokémon in play are [G] Pokémon”. In DPPt the word “type” is used when something’s type is being changed or in cases where there isn’t a specific targeted color [see Arceus LVX, Spinda (SV 46)], and says (type symbol) Pokémon when there’s a specific type targeted. See Dewgong (SV 24), Dawn Stadium (MD 79). [-2 points]
- "the number of Benched Pokémon you can have is now 8" -> "you can have 8 Benched Pokémon" (Giant Stump, Sky Field) [-2 points]
- "You can't put Pokémon (except for [G] Pokémon) into play" [-2 point(s)]

Fonts and Placement errors:
- Everything is looking good.

Creativity/Originality: 11/15
(The Body and Power are useful support effects we’ve seen in the past. Bench expanding is becoming more common.)
Believability/Playability: 15/15
(Both effects lend themselves to making a very consistent [G] deck. Mother Hive could be really fun with any effects that do more based on how many Benched Pokémon you have.)
Wording: 4/10
(Some era-specific errors.)
Fonts and Placement: 10/10
(Everything is on point.)
Aesthetics: 2/5
(I like the bees you have swarming around Vespiquen, but the art is lacking the 3D-like visuals traditionally seen with LV.X cards. Also, the way Vespiquen is coming out of the box has some issues — while it is normal for LV.X art to come out of the illus box, the art should not extend into the effect names or into the evo bar.)
Total: 42/50

Spoiler: 47bennyg’s Magnezone-GX

Nice to see Omnium continue to make its way around the community. Magnezone’s Ability leads to some interesting combinations, especially when you delve into the realm of Expanded. I like the idea of running a few tech stadiums that can disrupt top decks in the meta.

Wording errors:
- You’re allowed to say “non-[M]” in SM-on, rather than listing every other type. [-2 points]
- I’m not sure if “applied to” is correct, but I couldn’t find anything different, so it slides. [-0 point(s)]

Fonts and Placement errors:
- Custom blanks, your rules. However, everything lines up with stuff I’ve seen from Pone.

Creativity/Originality: 13/15
(The ability and GX attack are both quite unique and make for a really useful support mon. There’s not much synergy going on, though, and I would have liked to have seen more from the non-GX attack.)
Believability/Playability: 12/15
(While I really like the card and feel like the effects are cool, I do think it could lead to a BDIF situation. It allows any typed support to be used by [M] Pokémon, effectively prioritizing [M] above those other types. A few particularly useful examples are Dark City (UNM 193), Martial Arts Dojo (UNB 179), and Black Market Prism Star. (TEU 134).)
Wording: 8/10
(See above.)
Fonts and Placement: 5/5
(Custom blank, but everything looks correct for Omnium.)
Aesthetics: 4/5
(I feel like the holosheet needs to be brighter — at first glance, I thought the card was a non-holo.)
Total: 42/50

Spoiler: Fariszk7’s Spiritomb LV.X

Interesting that Spiritomb is the only Pokémon we saw twice. I like the running theme of Ghost-type Pokémon LV.X dying, only to affect the game post-mortem — brings Dusknoir LV.X to mind.

Wording errors:
- “(You still need the necessary Energy to use each attack.)” needs to be italicized. [-1 point]
-LV.X > LV.X (i.e. italicized) [-0.5 point]
- Per Garchomp LV.X, the power should send it to the opponent’s Bench “as a Basic Pokémon”. You also need at least one more clause to clarify ownership while Spiritomb is on your opponent’s Bench — who gets Prize cards when it’s Knocked Out? [-3 points]

Fonts and Placement errors:
- The Body and Power names are just a bit too big — if you’re using Meta’s font guide, those layers are a few point sizes off. [-1 point]

Creativity/Originality: 15/15
(The main part of this card is Eternal Malediction, and it’s an interesting effect with a few different uses. You could use it to clog your opponent’s Bench, use it to stall for spread damage, or use it as a shield — since your opponent often won’t want the power to activate.)
Believability/Playability: 12/15
(This card is really hard to place in the DPPt meta. Assuming when it’s on your opponent’s Bench it functions like their Pokémon and you’d take Prizes for a Knock Out, you could use it to soften their mons and then, when you Knock it Out, you get back the Prize you gave up to trigger the effect. The effect itself is something I don’t see making it to official cards, though, given how hard it is to keep track of. There’s been very few cards that you play to your opponent’s side of the field.)
Wording: 5.5/10
(A couple errors and a missing clause.)
Fonts and Placement: 4/5
(Minor font size thing.)
Aesthetics: 4.5/5
(The art and holosheet look good, but I have a minor issue with the way the stage bar goes over Spiritomb. It looks a little awkward.)
Total: 41/50

Spoiler: Top 3

3rd Place: AlphaLad's Porygon-Z +, with 43/50 points.
2nd Place: PMJ’s Glaceon, with 47/50 points.
1st Place: Nemes’s Spiritomb, with 48.5/50 points.

Neat! I always wanted some feedback from faking experts here, especially in wording, which is something I find myself struggling with. I just have one question regarding wording:
If Light Torterra has any [F] energy cards attached” > “If there are any [F] Energy cards attached to Light Torterra
These two seem very similar without any ambiguous wording that would lead into misunderstandings. Even if I have a profounding knowledge of the cards in the neo era (which I don't), it may be quite impossible to memorize or recall every sentence in every card. Of course, it is always the best and correct, to use references from authentic cards. Could you give me some advice on these wording issues? A ruling book from that era would be awesome, if you happen to have one.

 

[Jabberwock]

Neat! I always wanted some feedback from faking experts here, especially in wording, which is something I find myself struggling with. I just have one question regarding wording:
If Light Torterra has any [F] energy cards attached” > “If there are any [F] Energy cards attached to Light Torterra
These two seem very similar without any ambiguous wording that would lead into misunderstandings. Even if I have a profounding knowledge of the cards in the neo era (which I don't), it may be quite impossible to memorize or recall every sentence in every card. Of course, it is always the best and correct, to use references from authentic cards. Could you give me some advice on these wording issues? A ruling book from that era would be awesome, if you happen to have one.

Unfortunately there's not really any comprehensive compendium on wording — as you can probably imagine, that would be a very big document! Rather, the best way to go about wording an effect you don't already have a reference for is to use a site like [https://pkmncards.com], which has a searchable database of the text on every English card ever printed. By entering +text:"<text>" in the search bar (with the <text> replaced by whatever wording you're looking for), you can see whether any existing card has used the wording you're after. If it has, you're in luck!

If it hasn't, then your job gets a bit trickier. There's a few different tricks to finding good wording references — if you know it's a Poké-Power, for instance, you can search all cards from a given era that have Poké-Powers (go to the Advanced tab in the upper right to conduct a search like this). Or you can search tiny fragments of a phrase, like "Energy attached to it" — though sometimes this returns hundreds of results.

Another solid way to check wording is to just ask around. There's nothing against doing this in CaC or otherwise; just make sure to credit anyone who helps you with wording. There's plenty of knowledgeable fakers over on the Faking Community Discord who'd be very willing to help out.

 

[Alolan Teddiursa]

Unfortunately there's not really any comprehensive compendium on wording — as you can probably imagine, that would be a very big document! Rather, the best way to go about wording an effect you don't already have a reference for is to use a site like [https://pkmncards.com], which has a searchable database of the text on every English card ever printed. By entering +text:"" in the search bar (with the replaced by whatever wording you're looking for), you can see whether any existing card has used the wording you're after. If it has, you're in luck!

If it hasn't, then your job gets a bit trickier. There's a few different tricks to finding good wording references — if you know it's a Poké-Power, for instance, you can search all cards from a given era that have Poké-Powers (go to the Advanced tab in the upper right to conduct a search like this). Or you can search tiny fragments of a phrase, like "Energy attached to it" — though sometimes this returns hundreds of results.

Another solid way to check wording is to just ask around. There's nothing against doing this in CaC or otherwise; just make sure to credit anyone who helps you with wording. There's plenty of knowledgeable fakers over on the Faking Community Discord who'd be very willing to help out.

Thanks a lot for your reply and help! That website is really neat and useful! I will do better next time

 

[PMJ]

Scoring is higher than I thought it would have been. Guess this is the last time I try to putz around with glows lawl

The 2d art for the evocon is good information to know since I am about to embark on a 500-card DP journey, so thanks for that.

Azelf makes sense, I was thinking that you got to look at all your Prize cards and not just the face-down ones but, in hindsight, you could just pick a face up one if that was the one you needed. Sucks I could have had the twofer but I'll take second if it means losing to @Nemes, I never realized the intricacies of the card other than the green Ability button. That's super cool man.

Well played to everyone. Good luck in April!

 

[Fariszk7]

I'll happily take the 15/15 creativity! Great job on the cards everyone and amazing job Omega on the judging!

 

[All-Stars_Creator]

Thanks for the incredible feedback! Really helpful! I realize my submission was a bit of a weird one, making me all the more appreciative of the care and thought put in the response. So thank you again And congratulations to the winners!