Image-Based Results (Judged by CMP)
Heavenly Spoon:
I like it. One of the only things I can point out is that when Wizards was still producing the game, ‘attacking’ in ‘attacking Pokémon’ wasn’t capitalized. Otherwise, another great showing from Spoonypants.
Creativity/Originality: 20/20
Wording: 14/15
Fonts and Placement: 10/10
Believability/Playability: 5/5
Total: 49/50
bigfootaus:
I remember one of your first entries to CaC was the Radiant Collection style Klefki, and I love what you’ve done with Aegislash (for the most part) -- I’ve never seen an actual RC card in person, but in scans they don’t look like they have the splatter effect, which seems to be a bit much. You would’ve been better off with just the shield/sword motif. Wording looks fine, but as far as placement is concerned, I’d move the Energy cost/attack name/damage down a few pixels to be closer to the effect text.
Creativity/Originality: 18.5/20
Wording: 15/15
Fonts and Placement: 9/10
Believability/Playability: 4.5/5
Total: 47/50
PMJ & Athena:
I like the attacks. There’s something about them very fitting for a Froslass. Simple, but effective. I think there’s something wrong with your symbolsheet, though, as you can see some white artifact around the Energy symbol in the first attack. Overall, though, another great showing by the deadly duo!
Creativity/Originality: 19.5/20
Wording: 15/15
Fonts and Placement: 10/10
Believability/Playability: 5/5
Total: 49.5/50
professorlight:
I like the way you’ve adapted the BW/XY EX style for your blanks, but effectively utilizing the ex mechanic. The EX effect is nice, but a bit dark in places (namely the bottom by the W/R/RC/copyright). Opponent (and derivatives) shouldn’t be capitalized. You missed the accent in ‘Pokémon Tools’ (which should also read ‘Pokémon Tool cards’). I’m not sure, but to clarify each type of card seems rather pointless, and you could’ve just left it as ‘…the amount of cards you have in play.’ I’d suggest moving the effect text box over to the left so that there’s even space on both sides.
Creativity/Originality: 19/20
Wording: 13.5/15
Fonts and Placement: 9/10
Believability/Playability: 4.5/5
Total: 46/50
Delta:
I love when newer Pokémon are put onto older blanks! On the stat bar, Base-Neo-era cards rounded the stats, so ‘1’ 08’’’ should become ‘1’ 8’’’ and ’19.8’ should be rounded up to ‘20’. I’m not sure the exact ratio on Kitara Waterbender’s blanks are, but the effect needs to be smaller than the Power name. Also, remember to use numbers in stead of spelling them out. I’d also include the ‘…can’t be used if Hoopa is Asleep, Confused, or Paralyzed’ clause as most Energy moving cards of the era did as well. I’d suggest moving the second Energy symbol to the right a few pixels, as well as moving the attack text to the left a few pixels. I think a damage output of 20 or 30 would be more in-line for a Base-era Basic.
Creativity/Originality: 18.5/20
Wording: 13/15
Fonts and Placement: 8/10
Believability/Playability: 3.5/5
Total: 43/50
Auride:
Would’ve loved to see a full ‘Surprise Pokémon’ blank (maybe in the future) – sounds like an interesting idea! However, what remains (the Energy coming out onto the card border, Rotom coming out from the illustration border, asche’s copyright box) doesn’t really jive all that well. At the very least, I would’ve gotten rid of the Energy around the card border. Since there’s really no other place to take points off, I took a half-point from Believability as it just doesn’t look like anything TPCi would do. In the Ability, ‘your’ is misspelled as ‘you.’ I like the idea behind the card – and you’re right, it could be a great EX killer.
Creativity/Originality: 18/20
Wording: 14.5/15
Fonts and Placement: 10/10
Believability/Playability: 4.5/5
Total: 47/50
Blui:
Uncle Blui definitely did Zygarde’s blank justice! Great Poké-Power, very fitting for a Shedinja. In the attack, though, instead of repeating ‘If your opponent’, I’d suggest using ‘If he or she does,” The attack forces your opponent to make a tough call – put off damage now or get more later. Nice!
Creativity/Originality: 20/20
Wording: 14/15
Fonts and Placement: 10/10
Believability/Playability: 5/5
Total: 49/50
Nod3:
Very beautiful card you’ve got there. Nice dual-type, plus an item. Only thing I can see is that the effect text should use ‘each Special Energy’ instead of ‘every.’ YOLO5W4G fo sho, bro.
Creativity/Originality: 19.5/20
Wording: 14/15
Fonts and Placement: 10/10
Believability/Playability: 4.5/5
Edit: -2
Total: 46/50
Arcticwhite & Wigglytuff:
Very nice looking card! I’m just slightly confused as to what you did to the image to put yourself on the illustration credits – the effect overlay doesn’t count. I’d suggest moving the Ability name over a few pixels, and the attack effect text up a few pixels. Remember to always use numbers instead of spelling them out.
Creativity/Originality: 18/20
Wording: 14/15
Fonts and Placement: 8.5/10
Believability/Playability: 4/5
Total: 44.5/50
Pipotchi:
Always nice to see a new face! Unfortunately, it looks like you’re missing some of the correct fonts. If you’d like, send me a PM and I can try my best to help you out there! The “Evolves from…” text should be bold italic, and the HP should be moved over to the left a few pixels, as it’s currently overlapping the Energy symbol. The attack is nice, but CaC is where you should let your creativity flow, so another attack or an Ability would’ve been nice to see. Move the attack name down a couple pixels, and the right edge of the ‘0’ in ‘20’ should line up with the effect text edge, with the ‘+’ sign out from that. Overall, not too bad for a first-time card maker!
Creativity/Originality: 15/20
Wording: 15/15
Fonts and Placement: 5/10
Believability/Playability: 4/5
-2 (editing)
Total: 37/50
Carpey:
Another brand new faker – awesome! Fonts need some work (PM me and I’ll try to help). Also, the effect text needs to be even on both sides of the card. Honestly, while I understand why you included Cripple, it doesn’t really add anything to the card; in fact, it takes up room that could’ve been used to give an interesting effect to Phantom Slash. Attack damage should be moved to the right a bit. What program do you use? Photoshop CS2 is now available for free on Adobe’s website I believe – and using it may help you improve!
Creativity/Originality: 16/20
Wording: 15/15
Fonts and Placement: 5/10
Believability/Playability: 3/5
Total: 39/50
myoKun345:
Interesting blank, myoKun345. Not very Pokémon-esque, but works very well with the holosheet you’ve chosen! I don’t think using ‘Stage 0’ instead of ‘Basic’ was a good choice (nor very realistic). The card is pretty standard, and nothing sticks out as far as attacks are concerned. Going by XY wording, however, Ghostly Burn should read, ‘Flip a coin. If heads, your opponent’s Active Pokémon is now Burned.’ Placement looks off-center to me, but that’s probably because of the white text boxes. I do like your choice to use a single Colorless symbol with a number to show off RC, though!
Creativity/Originality: 17/20
Wording: 14/15
Fonts and Placement: 9/10
Believability/Playability: 4/5
Total: 44/50
1st Place: Dynamic Duo (PMJ & Athena) - 49.5/50
2nd Place: Blui, Heavenly Spoon - 49/50
3rd Place: Auride, bigfootaus - 47/50
Text-Based Results (Judged by Heavenly Spoon)
Judge note:
Just a warning, I’ve been very strict. For believability this meant that I wasn’t afraid to deduce at least 5 points for cards which would critically affect most formats in a negative way. For creativity this meant that a card which introduced nothing new at all would not receive a passing grade. For wording, to keep it simple and consistent, I used a very rudimentary metric:
-3 for not including necessary clarification or unclear effects.
-2 for big mistakes like forgetting a word or using wrong sentence structure.
-1 for minor mistakes like forgetting a capital letter, a comma and the likes.
Every duplicate mistake is half the points of the original.
All this means the mean is only 33.6 and the median is only 36.5, so don’t be too saddened by a score which seems a lot lower than usual.
bbninjas:
A very creative concept. I like the idea of using your hand Pokémon to attack, and I don’t think it’s been done before, so great job on that! The synergy between the attack and the Ability it great as well. This is the sort of cards I wanted to see, so kudos to you.
That being said, I’m not sure it’s terribly believable. Being able to do such massive spread damage essentially for free while still being able to attack seems a bit much. I’m not 100% sure it would actually end up being broken, but it does feel unbalanced and abusable, perhaps because it’s so unique. I really wish Pokémon were a TCG which allowed for more cards like this, but in the current format I feel this might be too upsetting one way or another.
The order of effects in the Ability feels a bit iffy, since there’s a technical window in between doing damage and discarding where your opponent does not know if you’re being truthful about the amount of Energy cards in your hand. I guess this doesn’t matter, but it still feels wrong to me. Using “Energy” instead of “Energy cards” is a bit iffy, since Energy cards only provide Energy when attached to a Pokémon, but old Rainbow Energy wording does seem to agree with you, so I’ll give you that one. Wording seems okay otherwise.
Creativity/Originality: 19/20
(Wooo!)
Wording: 14.5/15
(Feels a bit too iffy for a full 15/15.)
Believability/Playability: 10/15
(I wish I could make this score higher, but I feel this is as much as I can give you.)
Total: 43.5/50
Drohn:
“(After your attack)” is something quite novel which we sadly don’t see more often. It’s a nice way of slowing down set-up and it makes sure you can’t use the power for another Litwick after just playing this one. That being said, being able to do it every turn might be a bit much, although I guess this does force you to choose between evolving immediately or waiting a turn so you can get a Chandelure, what with the “after your attack” bit. You know, this might be way cleverer than I initially anticipated. A surprisingly good job.
I like the first attack as well, which does a nice job of having increasingly severe effects for each heads. The second attack seems a bit superfluous, but it does kind of work in synergy with the first one. Not very creative, though.
Some wording mistakes: “Defending” and “Benched” should be capitalised, “Paralysed” should be written in stupid American English, no “an” before [F], always use “a” for Energy symbols. Also, normally R is used for Fire, but since you made them red I’ll let it slide.
The HP is a bit high, and the card in general is probably a bit too good since it allows for some very easy and efficient set-ups, but for a first card it’s surprisingly believable. I’m also a fan of having more potent Basics, so no complaints here.
Creativity/Originality: 16/20
(You changed “before” to “after and it somehow became quite a neat mechanic ._.)
Wording: 11/15
(Capitalisation, “an”, “Paralysed”.)
Believability/Playability: 12/15
(A bit too good.)
Total: 39/50
GadgetJax:
First of all: “excluding Pokémon-Ex” makes me love this card already. This doesn’t appear on nearly enough cards.
As someone who lived through the classic era, I’m always weary of things which discard Energy a bit too freely, but this does seem like a very interesting Ability. It forces some kind of risk minimisation from your opponent, which is always more fun than a more rudimentary luck-based effect.
You italicising the entire card makes it hard for me to judge if you italicised everything correctly, I’m deducing .5 points for cheating the system. The only other wording mistake I can find is that it should be “basic Energy cards” and Special Energy cards”, they provide Energy, which can be discarded, but the Energy itself isn’t basic or Special, the card is.
I can’t decided if the attack is way better than Flareon PLF’s or worse. Having it just be Psychic Pokémon (which interestingly enough isn’t Aegislash’s type, which makes building a very focussed deck harder) does balance it a bit. I do know that it might be a bit too good in combination with the Ability. Hard to tell nowadays...
Creativity/Originality: 14/20
(Fun take on an otherwise bland Ability, some very nice minor balancing.)
Wording: 12.5/15
(Should be “basic Energy Card”.)
Believability/Playability: 14.5/15
(Too good? I honestly don’t know. Good Stage2s are always welcome, though.)
Total: 41/50
GM DracLord:
Let’s start with wording errors: you’ve misspelt “Misdreavus” x2, it’s “before your attack”, not “before you attack”, you didn’t italicise “(before your attack)”, I don’t think there’s supposed to be an “s” in “ex’s attack”, attack should be plural, “its own” not “it’s own” (which would mean “it is own”), “If you do” seems out of place since the power didn’t specify you doing anything, no space after a full stop, “less than damage counters” how many?, “Move as manage” I think you mean “many”?, forgot a “you” there, “from due to this attack’s effect” *cringe*, “instead discarding” forgot “of”, “discarding it to the discard pile” where else would you discard it?
Could you please proof-read next time?
Let’s see what we can salvage with creativity. We’ve seen attack-sharing effects before, most notably on Honchkrow MT, though having damage as a pay-off is pretty novel. Hit-and-Run has been around since Dark Alakazam. The attack seems original, but since it’s missing some vital information I’m not sure how to judge it. I’m assuming you meant something like “less than 6 damage counters” to keep it from being broken. Thematically, Spirit Share seems pretty creative, what with giving up a part of the soul to help a teammate.
Creativity/Originality: 14/20
(Pretty creative.)
Wording: 0/15
(It was pretty bad...)
Believability/Playability: 15/15
(Seems fine.)
Total: 29/50
Ice Espeon:
Have a joke:
A nazi in charge of mining operations reports to Hitler saying there’s going to be structural problems if they keep mining minerals at this rate.
Hitler respons with “Well, then mine less!”
A grammer nazi bursts in: “Mine fewer!”.
To which Hitler responds “yes?”.
*Ahem* what I’m trying to say is that you should use “fewer” instead of “less”. Other than that, “(Both yours and your opponent’s)” and similar should be italicised x2, you’re missing “in play”, and it should be “with a spirit counter on them”. Other than that everything seems fine. Some of the wording has no real precedent and therefore enjoys the ultimate wording loophole.
About the card itself. I’m not a fan of introducing counters without explaining them. Especially in the recent era where everything has been dumbed down. That being said, they do sound like a fun mechanic which could lead to some creative and strategic play. I’m a bit puzzled as to why you’d limit them to 2, though, which seems a bit underwhelming (though perhaps a bit more balanced than if you’d have placed no restrictions at all). Being able to use the attacks of a Pokémon with a spirit counter on it seems like a nice addition as well. I’m not sure about the W/R, which, while technically correct when looking at the video games seems unprecedented in the TCG. The TCG tends to follow its own rules with regards to weakness and resistance, and usually focusses on the type of the card to decide. So picking non-conventional weaknesses/resistances for Ghost (such as no Weakness at all like the older cards) would’ve been bad enough, but picking unconventional weakness and resistance for Dragon on a P-typed card is going a bit too far.
Creativity/Originality: 17/20
(Spirit counters seem fun.)
Wording: 10/15
(Italicisation, wording, and being literally Hitler.)
Believability/Playability: 9/15
(The counters seem dubious in the current format, W/R.)
Total: 35.5/50
Keeper of Night:
Wording is a bit iffy, I’d have used “all Energy cards attached to the Defending Pokémon provide [P] Energy”, but I think it might be valid nevertheless. You didn’t capitalise “active”, though. The only other wording error I can spot is that you didn’t capitalise “evolves” in the text above the picture.
We’ve seen 3/4 Paralysis before, and we’ve seen bounce effects before, though both do fit thematically. Scared Stiff is very creative, but I’m not sure how doable this would be. I feel this would needlessly shut down or cripple otherwise perfectly viable decks and worst of all force people to play Psychic even more. This might honestly be the most annoying card ever if it were ever released, maybe after the old Slowking... Cards are designed to be fun, this card seems anything but.
Creativity/Originality: 16/20
(Creative power, quite thematic.)
Wording: 13.5/15
(Capitalisation errors.)
Believability/Playability: 11/15
(Very impactful power which seems too good and annoying.)
Total: 40.5/50
Lugia123:
You forgot “Basic”, but that’s pretty minor in my opinion so you only get a -1 for this. Other errors are of course “Reatreat”, “opponents” x2, “active” and “knocked out” without a capitalisation and you forgot 2 commas (after “if your opponent attacks” and after “At the end of your opponent’s next turn”). Oh, and one big problem: Pokémon in your hand can’t be Knocked Out, so you’d need to have included a line which says what happens to this card if it attacks from your hand (which would be always). I’d have merged the Ability and attack and made it one big Ability which says that, if you did not attack during your last turn, you may discard this card from your hand to reflect an attack, after which you discard this card and your opponent gets to draw a prize card.
The card itself is a lot of fun, and quite reminiscent of other card games like Magic the Gathering. I’m not sure if I have anything to add. There’s a pretty big chance that this produces a stalemate, where both players are down to their last prize card and no player wants to attack because they know the other might activate this card. That alone definitely hurts the believability, on top of the fact that it goes against pretty much every Pokémon convention.
Creativity/Originality: 18/20
(Fun new mechanics = lots of points.)
Wording: 4.5/15
(Lots of minor errors, no rules clarification.)
Believability/Playability: 7/15
(Stalemate-inducing, pretty funky.)
Total: 29.5/50
Luispipe8:
Weakness:
x2
Resistance:
-20
Retreat:
It’s not really theft if you’re just throwing it away, is it? This sounds like Knock Off... Wait, you called it Knock Off in your description. At least Sneasel AQ and LA had the decency of shuffling it back in your opponent’s deck instead of outright breaking it. Cursed Blast as a name seems fine, though.
Wording is good as should be expected. Creativity is lackingas should also be expected. Not Knock Off basically copies Knock Off from the games, and can hardly be called novel. Pachirisu GE also has a very similar effect. I really like how the attack fits thematically, but it feels very underwhelming for the era. 100 doesn’t KO that much nowadays (perhaps other Banette), so a 4-Energy cost, 2 Energy discard and an anti-engine clause seem a bit much. Being limited to Benched Pokémon also hurts. I’m not used to post-power creep attacks being worse than pre-power creep ones, even if it’s from old ex cards (Steelix ex). The first attack, if somewhat situational, seems far more useful.
Other than that everything seems fine.
Creativity/Originality: 11/20
(Nice thematic fit, otherwise pretty lacking.)
Wording: 15/15
(Anything less and you would’ve never heard the end of it.)
Believability/Playability: 14/15
(Very good first attack paired with underwhelming second attack.)
Total: 40/50
Machamp The Champion:
You didn’t italicise (before your attack), I’m deducting points for this mainly because I’m a horrible person. Other than that the wording seems fine enough, don’t worry.
I like the almost prohibitively expensive search Ability. It has a very nice trade-off and can’t be recklessly teched into any and all decks like most search abilities. It requires at least some prior set-up and quite some dedication to pull off and keep going, but if done successfully it could be very powerful. It’s always hard to judge how good a search ability will be, but I think you’ve done a good job of balancing it. The attack has some nice synergy going on, I don’t think we’ve seen that many discard pile dependant attacks which don’t require shuffling, let alone one which compares discard piles. I’m not sure what else to say, really. Great job!
Creativity/Originality: 18/20
(Fun, balanced search effect, creative attack, nice synergy.)
Wording: 14/15
(Me being a horrible person.)
Believability/Playability: 15/15
(No problems here, I think. A bit convoluted for the recent era, but that’s fine by me.)
Total: 47/50
Metal Gear BIDOOF:
Wording for the Ability should be “When you play this Pokémon from your hand to evolve 1 of your Pokémon” or “When you play this Pokémon from your hand to evolve Litwick” (though that’d be weirdly specific). I’d reword the rest as “You may put 1 damage counters on each of your opponent's Pokémon for each [R] Energy attached to this Pokémon.”
Other than that it looks like a pretty neat card. I like the idea of forcing a decision between a speedy set-up (which Spirit Kindling provides) and waiting a few turns to increase the damage output of Heat the Soul. That being said, Heat the Soul is far too strong. Forretress FLF only does 1 damage and it’s a final stage. I’d have limited it to 1 Pokémon, which would’ve still made it very good in a Chandelure deck, but wouldn’t cause game-breaking in and of itself. Imagine pairing this with Devolution Spray or anything similar and some form of Energy acceleration (Emboar being the best case scenario, obviously). You wouldn’t even have to do direct damage, you’d just need to stall while having this thing on your bench.
Creativity/Originality: 15/20
(Fun mechanic, I don’t think we’ve seen Energy-dependant evolvution effects before.)
Wording: 12/15
(Wrong wording + unconventional wording in the Ability.)
Believability/Playability: 9/15
(Far too strong.)
Edit Penalty: -2 (sorry, the rules are the rules.)
Total: 34/50
Momaster12:
Let’s see, you didn’t italicise (before your attack), which I’ve been deducing points for because I’m despicable. Also, the “back” shouldn’t be there (see for example Musharna PHF) and you forgot a comma after “If you do”. That’s it, I think.
Shuffling back is always a nice effect, though I’m not sure 2 item cards would be worth the trouble. And Mischievous Shadows seems nice, but the damage reduction seems a bit much for a single discard. I feel I’ve seen Tyranitar do worse things in far less power-creeped formats. The HP seems on par with older Gengar cards, but it might still be correct after the BW power creep considering Pokémon like Gardevoir also didn’t really get affected by it. Giving Gengar retreat also seems at odd with most recent incarnations. While none of this is wrong, it all helps reinforce that this card seems awfully weak. Most of the pre-power creep Gengars did roughly the same amount of damage (60 + poison, 60 + Bench damage + switch), for roughly the same Energy requirements. Creativity is perhaps lacking as well, shuffling back is nice, as is the trade-off between discarding and damage, but neither seem terribly creative or as thoroughly worked out as I’d like them to be.
Creativity/Originality: 11/20
(Nothing surprising.)
Wording: 12/15
(Minor errors.)
Believability/Playability: 14/15
(Perhaps too underwhelming weak for a BW-on card.)
Total: 37/50
NameBlank:
Hmmm, can’t say this is the most creative of cards. We’ve seen self-inflicted status conditions with beneficial effects before quite often, especially with Sleep (though most often on Snorlax). Healing between turns isn’t new either, and neither is countering Pokémon-EX. I’ afraid I can’t really give you a lot of points for creativity…
As for wording. The wording on Cresselia-EX for in between turns healing is slightly different, but I think your wording should be okay. The wording for the attack is wrong, though. There should be a full stop after “damage”, and a comma after “then”. Otherwise everything seems fine.
Creativity/Originality: 10/20
(Nothing new.)
Wording: 14/15
(Error in the attack effect.)
Believability/Playability: 15/15
(Seems fine.)
Edit Penalty: -2
Total: 37/50
Scorched Feathers:
I’m sorry to say you did mess up on wording. When you move a card from the discard to your hand, you should use “put” and not “add”. You also discard cards “from” your hand, not “in” your hands.
There’s one major believability issue, which is that you don’t have to show your hand to your opponent to use Mysterious Incantation’s lose effect. This means there’s a possibility of foul play. This is the reason why whenever you have have to search your deck for a specific kind of card you have to show it to your opponent.
The Ability and Trickery end up being a severely nerfed version of Porygon 2’s GE power, which wasn’t tremendously popular in anything but unlimited, so it might be on the weak side. A Rock-Paper-Scissors game has been done quite a lot, so no points for originality there. Using a Supporter’s effect as the effect of an attack has also been done by Sableye SF. There’s some nice synergy going on between the attacks, though, so at least you’ve got that going for you.
Also, for some reason you used a capital i instead of an l to type “lbs.” I guess it makes no difference, but still, weird.
Creativity/Originality: 13/20
(It’s all been done before. But some nice synergy.)
Wording: 11/15
(“add”, “in”.)
Believability/Playability: 12/15
(No show-your-hand effect, slightly underwhelming.)
Total: 36/50
SeventhPrize:
Your Ability made me laugh, that’s always a good sign. You could’ve made it send both Pokémon to the Lost Zone and not allow either player to draw a prize card, though, just to add to the flavour, but still. I’m not sure how good the Ability is, considering it’s linked to an EX and requires an Energy. I’m assuming you don’t draw a prize card here, otherwise this would almost always be a brutal 2-for-2 with you getting to attack afterward.
The attack’s pretty fun as well, but it might be too easy to build a hit-and-run deck with. The flip hurts, but you’re still doing an easy 40 or more damage and running. There’s some nice synergy between hit-and-run and being able to make an opponent’s Pokémon disappear, though, so kudos for that.
As for wording, you didn’t italicise the (before your attack), you forgot the é in Pokémon x2, and “Discard” is vague, since it doesn’t say if this Knocks Out that Pokémon or not and whether or not you get to draw any prize cards.
Creativity/Originality: 17/20
(Creative and very thematic.)
Wording: 9.5/15
(Forgot clarification and some small errors.)
Believability/Playability: 14/15
(Might be too good, I don’t know.)
Total: 40.5/50
steffenka:
That ability’s going to cost you big time. Against a lot of decks it allows you to trade 1-for-1, or even 1-for-2 against Pokémon-EX, while requiring no set-up or commitment of your own. You could be setting up with this thing active waiting for your opponent to KO, either slowly with a small ‘mon they’re willing to sacrifice, or with a big ‘mon and wasting all of its set-up and Energy, so not quite a fair trade. There’s a reason why every single instance of an Ability or Poké-Power Knocking Out an opponent after being Knocked Out requires a coin flip.
Gold Toss, while still insanely good, feels mild in comparison. It’s sort of a no-lose coin toss, with both options stopping most Pokémon from attacking and possibly even retreating.
Wording seems fine in general, but the Ability should be “If this Pokémon is Knocked Out by damage from an attack, the Attacking Pokémon is Knocked Out.” because otherwise it’s unclear what exactly does and does not activate the Ability (does Poison, for example?).
Creativity/Originality: 9/20
(Way too standard.)
Wording: 12/15
(Ambiguous wording in Ability.)
Believability/Playability: 1/15
(Way way way too good.)
Total: 22/50
Reggie McGigas:
Ugh. I don’t like doing this, but there is a precedent for fakemon so I guess this is allowed. Ugh again.
The wording for the Ability seems wrong. You’re not the one doing the damage, the attack is. The only mistake I can find in the wording for the attack is that 1 is singular, in which case one would use “is”.
Changing types seems like an odd thing to add a positive trade-off on top of, especially if that type is Psychic, a type so many other Pokémon have weakness to. Unless you’re going for weakness (which would mean at most 10 additional damage, but most of the time 10 less damage) it seems completely pointless not to change, and even then you’d probably want to change..
The synergy with the attack is also pretty weird, since you’re unsure if you’re doing damage. This leads me to a far more serious problem with the wording, which doesn’t specify when during the attack you make this decision. This is pretty important, because presumably your decision whether to change or not depends on whether or not you’ll be doing damage. The whole attack in general seems rather random and thematically lacking.
There seems to have been a misunderstanding.
The wording for the Ability seems wrong. You’re not the one doing the damage, the attack is. There's also no such thing as a Weakness "of", it's a Weakness "to", the wording of the second part in general seems wrong, and should probably include "change" or "becomes". The only other mistake I can find in the wording for the attack is that 1 is singular, in which case one would use “is”.
changing weakness seems like a fun mechanic and provides a fun trade-off.
Also, based on previous Xamatter cards this... ugh.
If you use a Fakemon, at the very least add a Pokédex entry.
Creativity/Originality: 16/20
(Fakemon, ugh.)
Wording: 9/15
(“is”, problems with wording Ability.)
Believability/Playability: 15/15
(Win-win trade-off in Ability is weird. No problems here.)
Total: 40/50
Salamencetrainer34:
Let’s go through all the wording errors first: wording should be: “When you play this Pokémon from your hand to evolve 1 of your Pokémon,” “Pokémon” not “pokemon” x6, “Benched,” “Active,” “Defending,” “Condition,” “Special,” Energy” x2, “Froslass,” and “Bench” should be capitalised, “opponent’s” is missing an apostrophe x3, “in any way you like” not “in any way you wish,” “Special Energy Card” not “Special Energy” (Energies themselves are never special), wording should be “if you do, this attack does 50 more damage”, use “a” instead of “1”, “60+ more damage” the + is redundant, you added a space before a comma, and suddenly you’re using “Froslass” instead of “this Pokémon” x2. I think that’s enough. I hope for your sake and my sanity that this is everything.
Chilling Glare is far too powerful when compared to other evolve effects. You have the power of one of the absolute best cards ever, Luxray GL LvX, damage spread on par with Forretress FLF, and insta-poison or paralysis to boot, which would’ve been broken by itself. The lament of the icy cave is boring but pretty strong nevertheless. Powerful ice seems random, ridiculously pricey and somewhat boring. I’m not sure what else to say here. You can’t just add random effects and hope to win some creativity points.
...Resistance to Metal? ._.
If you add a power or attack, try and find similar versions and compare how powerful they are. If yours is far more powerful than any of them, you might need to tone it down. Otherwise you end up with cards like this, which would end up 4 times in any deck, no questions asked. And please, please, please proofread. It saves me a lot of trouble and gives you a lot more points.
Creativity/Originality: 8/20
(It’s something.)
Wording: 0/15
(Help.)
Believability/Playability: 2/15
(Help.)
Edit Penalty: -2 (Oh God.)
Total: 8/50
Tails:
Oh God, that Ability ._.
You don’t simply become a Pokémon without a card full of elaborations, it’s why they did Ditto Base Set once and only once: it’s far too complex a thing to do. How long do you stay that Pokémon? What if that Pokémon changes? Can Rotom evolve? Does that Pokémon even stay in play? I’m afraid I don’t understand it fully, but from what I can tell it’s broken beyond belief. Copy a Benched Pokémon-EX, don’t pay for its energy costs and don’t apply any possible negative effects? Is there any format in which this wouldn’t be completely game-breaking?
Also, attacks don’t have types, so that also hurts believability. Should’ve been Rotom’s type which changes during the attack. Also, you forgot to add a “-20” or something to the Resistance. The Special Condition clause also hasn’t been used in ages, I’m not sure why you decided to bring it back.
Let’s go through all the wording mistakes: it’s “Ability”, not “PokeAbility”, no comma after (before your attack), (before your attack) should be italicised, every type starts with a consonant, so never use “an”, use
Pokémon and not “
-type Pokémon”, “choose” instead of “select”, Pokémon has an “é” x4, “Bench” should be capitalised, “card’s” not “cards”, “used for the
” sounds horribly iffy and should at include the word “pay”, “converted to” sounds weird, use “can’t” instead of “cannot”, “though” does not really belong on a card, and lastly, why are you suddenly using “Colorless” instead of “
”?
Now for something positive: Machine Override, if a bit oddly named, sounds like quite an interesting concept. Badly worded and explained, yes, but interesting none the less. It’s subtly different from “Choose a Basic Energy card attached to this Pokémon, this Pokémon becomes that type until the end of your turn.”, I like it. Infiltration is, I assume, a reference to how Rotom can take over objects and the likes, so I guess that’s thematically fitting.
Creativity/Originality: 13/20
(Interesting type-change mechanic, thematic.)
Wording: 0/15
(I’m sorry, but this was a train wreck. Please do some research next time.)
Believability/Playability: 1/15
(That ability ._.)
Total: 14/50
3rd Place: Our 3rd place winner is GadgetJax and is well-made Aegislash, earning him 41/50 points.
2nd Place: Second place goes to bbninjas, who earned 43.5/50 points thanks to his very funky Bannette-EX.
1st Place: And the champion is of course Machamp the Champion, whose Chandelure crushed the competition and got him an incredibly high 47/50 points.[/hr]
Heavenly Spoon:
I like it. One of the only things I can point out is that when Wizards was still producing the game, ‘attacking’ in ‘attacking Pokémon’ wasn’t capitalized. Otherwise, another great showing from Spoonypants.
Creativity/Originality: 20/20
Wording: 14/15
Fonts and Placement: 10/10
Believability/Playability: 5/5
Total: 49/50
bigfootaus:
I remember one of your first entries to CaC was the Radiant Collection style Klefki, and I love what you’ve done with Aegislash (for the most part) -- I’ve never seen an actual RC card in person, but in scans they don’t look like they have the splatter effect, which seems to be a bit much. You would’ve been better off with just the shield/sword motif. Wording looks fine, but as far as placement is concerned, I’d move the Energy cost/attack name/damage down a few pixels to be closer to the effect text.
Creativity/Originality: 18.5/20
Wording: 15/15
Fonts and Placement: 9/10
Believability/Playability: 4.5/5
Total: 47/50
PMJ & Athena:
I like the attacks. There’s something about them very fitting for a Froslass. Simple, but effective. I think there’s something wrong with your symbolsheet, though, as you can see some white artifact around the Energy symbol in the first attack. Overall, though, another great showing by the deadly duo!
Creativity/Originality: 19.5/20
Wording: 15/15
Fonts and Placement: 10/10
Believability/Playability: 5/5
Total: 49.5/50
professorlight:
I like the way you’ve adapted the BW/XY EX style for your blanks, but effectively utilizing the ex mechanic. The EX effect is nice, but a bit dark in places (namely the bottom by the W/R/RC/copyright). Opponent (and derivatives) shouldn’t be capitalized. You missed the accent in ‘Pokémon Tools’ (which should also read ‘Pokémon Tool cards’). I’m not sure, but to clarify each type of card seems rather pointless, and you could’ve just left it as ‘…the amount of cards you have in play.’ I’d suggest moving the effect text box over to the left so that there’s even space on both sides.
Creativity/Originality: 19/20
Wording: 13.5/15
Fonts and Placement: 9/10
Believability/Playability: 4.5/5
Total: 46/50
Delta:
I love when newer Pokémon are put onto older blanks! On the stat bar, Base-Neo-era cards rounded the stats, so ‘1’ 08’’’ should become ‘1’ 8’’’ and ’19.8’ should be rounded up to ‘20’. I’m not sure the exact ratio on Kitara Waterbender’s blanks are, but the effect needs to be smaller than the Power name. Also, remember to use numbers in stead of spelling them out. I’d also include the ‘…can’t be used if Hoopa is Asleep, Confused, or Paralyzed’ clause as most Energy moving cards of the era did as well. I’d suggest moving the second Energy symbol to the right a few pixels, as well as moving the attack text to the left a few pixels. I think a damage output of 20 or 30 would be more in-line for a Base-era Basic.
Creativity/Originality: 18.5/20
Wording: 13/15
Fonts and Placement: 8/10
Believability/Playability: 3.5/5
Total: 43/50
Auride:
Would’ve loved to see a full ‘Surprise Pokémon’ blank (maybe in the future) – sounds like an interesting idea! However, what remains (the Energy coming out onto the card border, Rotom coming out from the illustration border, asche’s copyright box) doesn’t really jive all that well. At the very least, I would’ve gotten rid of the Energy around the card border. Since there’s really no other place to take points off, I took a half-point from Believability as it just doesn’t look like anything TPCi would do. In the Ability, ‘your’ is misspelled as ‘you.’ I like the idea behind the card – and you’re right, it could be a great EX killer.
Creativity/Originality: 18/20
Wording: 14.5/15
Fonts and Placement: 10/10
Believability/Playability: 4.5/5
Total: 47/50
Blui:
Uncle Blui definitely did Zygarde’s blank justice! Great Poké-Power, very fitting for a Shedinja. In the attack, though, instead of repeating ‘If your opponent’, I’d suggest using ‘If he or she does,” The attack forces your opponent to make a tough call – put off damage now or get more later. Nice!
Creativity/Originality: 20/20
Wording: 14/15
Fonts and Placement: 10/10
Believability/Playability: 5/5
Total: 49/50
Nod3:
Very beautiful card you’ve got there. Nice dual-type, plus an item. Only thing I can see is that the effect text should use ‘each Special Energy’ instead of ‘every.’ YOLO5W4G fo sho, bro.
Creativity/Originality: 19.5/20
Wording: 14/15
Fonts and Placement: 10/10
Believability/Playability: 4.5/5
Edit: -2
Total: 46/50
Arcticwhite & Wigglytuff:
Very nice looking card! I’m just slightly confused as to what you did to the image to put yourself on the illustration credits – the effect overlay doesn’t count. I’d suggest moving the Ability name over a few pixels, and the attack effect text up a few pixels. Remember to always use numbers instead of spelling them out.
Creativity/Originality: 18/20
Wording: 14/15
Fonts and Placement: 8.5/10
Believability/Playability: 4/5
Total: 44.5/50
Pipotchi:
Always nice to see a new face! Unfortunately, it looks like you’re missing some of the correct fonts. If you’d like, send me a PM and I can try my best to help you out there! The “Evolves from…” text should be bold italic, and the HP should be moved over to the left a few pixels, as it’s currently overlapping the Energy symbol. The attack is nice, but CaC is where you should let your creativity flow, so another attack or an Ability would’ve been nice to see. Move the attack name down a couple pixels, and the right edge of the ‘0’ in ‘20’ should line up with the effect text edge, with the ‘+’ sign out from that. Overall, not too bad for a first-time card maker!
Creativity/Originality: 15/20
Wording: 15/15
Fonts and Placement: 5/10
Believability/Playability: 4/5
-2 (editing)
Total: 37/50
Carpey:
Another brand new faker – awesome! Fonts need some work (PM me and I’ll try to help). Also, the effect text needs to be even on both sides of the card. Honestly, while I understand why you included Cripple, it doesn’t really add anything to the card; in fact, it takes up room that could’ve been used to give an interesting effect to Phantom Slash. Attack damage should be moved to the right a bit. What program do you use? Photoshop CS2 is now available for free on Adobe’s website I believe – and using it may help you improve!
Creativity/Originality: 16/20
Wording: 15/15
Fonts and Placement: 5/10
Believability/Playability: 3/5
Total: 39/50
myoKun345:
Interesting blank, myoKun345. Not very Pokémon-esque, but works very well with the holosheet you’ve chosen! I don’t think using ‘Stage 0’ instead of ‘Basic’ was a good choice (nor very realistic). The card is pretty standard, and nothing sticks out as far as attacks are concerned. Going by XY wording, however, Ghostly Burn should read, ‘Flip a coin. If heads, your opponent’s Active Pokémon is now Burned.’ Placement looks off-center to me, but that’s probably because of the white text boxes. I do like your choice to use a single Colorless symbol with a number to show off RC, though!
Creativity/Originality: 17/20
Wording: 14/15
Fonts and Placement: 9/10
Believability/Playability: 4/5
Total: 44/50
1st Place: Dynamic Duo (PMJ & Athena) - 49.5/50
2nd Place: Blui, Heavenly Spoon - 49/50
3rd Place: Auride, bigfootaus - 47/50
Text-Based Results (Judged by Heavenly Spoon)
Judge note:
Just a warning, I’ve been very strict. For believability this meant that I wasn’t afraid to deduce at least 5 points for cards which would critically affect most formats in a negative way. For creativity this meant that a card which introduced nothing new at all would not receive a passing grade. For wording, to keep it simple and consistent, I used a very rudimentary metric:
-3 for not including necessary clarification or unclear effects.
-2 for big mistakes like forgetting a word or using wrong sentence structure.
-1 for minor mistakes like forgetting a capital letter, a comma and the likes.
Every duplicate mistake is half the points of the original.
All this means the mean is only 33.6 and the median is only 36.5, so don’t be too saddened by a score which seems a lot lower than usual.
bbninjas:
bbninjas said:Basic Banette-EX HP160 [P]
When a Pokémon-EX has been Knocked Out, your opponent takes 2 Prize cards.
[Ability] Unleashed Grudge
Once during your turn (before your attack), if this Pokémon is in your hand, you may reveal it. If you do, put damage counters on each of your opponent's Pokémon equal to the amount of Energy in your hand. Then, discard your hand.
[P] [P] Voodoo Madness 40
Attach 2 different types of basic Energy cards from your discard pile to this Pokémon. During your opponent's next turn, if this Pokémon is your Active Pokémon and is Knocked Out by damage from an opponent's attack, return this Pokémon and all cards attached to it to your hand.
weakness [D]x2 resistance [F]-20
retreat [C]
A very creative concept. I like the idea of using your hand Pokémon to attack, and I don’t think it’s been done before, so great job on that! The synergy between the attack and the Ability it great as well. This is the sort of cards I wanted to see, so kudos to you.
That being said, I’m not sure it’s terribly believable. Being able to do such massive spread damage essentially for free while still being able to attack seems a bit much. I’m not 100% sure it would actually end up being broken, but it does feel unbalanced and abusable, perhaps because it’s so unique. I really wish Pokémon were a TCG which allowed for more cards like this, but in the current format I feel this might be too upsetting one way or another.
The order of effects in the Ability feels a bit iffy, since there’s a technical window in between doing damage and discarding where your opponent does not know if you’re being truthful about the amount of Energy cards in your hand. I guess this doesn’t matter, but it still feels wrong to me. Using “Energy” instead of “Energy cards” is a bit iffy, since Energy cards only provide Energy when attached to a Pokémon, but old Rainbow Energy wording does seem to agree with you, so I’ll give you that one. Wording seems okay otherwise.
Creativity/Originality: 19/20
(Wooo!)
Wording: 14.5/15
(Feels a bit too iffy for a full 15/15.)
Believability/Playability: 10/15
(I wish I could make this score higher, but I feel this is as much as I can give you.)
Total: 43.5/50
Drohn:
Mr. Selfy himself said:[Basic] Litwick HP70 [P]
[Ability] Luring Flame
Once during your turn (after your attack), you may search your deck for Lampent or Chandelure, reveal it, and put it into your hand.
[P][F] Frightening Flame [20]
Flip 3 coins. If 1 of them is heads, the defending Pokémon is now Burned. If 2 of them are heads, the defending Pokémon is now Paralysed. If all of them are heads, the defending Pokémon is now Burned and Paralysed.
[P][F] Luring Light
Discard an [F] Energy attached to this Pokémon. If you opponent has any benched Pokémon, you may switch one of them with the defending Pokémon.
Weakness
[W]x2
Resistance
[F]-20
Retreat
[C]
“(After your attack)” is something quite novel which we sadly don’t see more often. It’s a nice way of slowing down set-up and it makes sure you can’t use the power for another Litwick after just playing this one. That being said, being able to do it every turn might be a bit much, although I guess this does force you to choose between evolving immediately or waiting a turn so you can get a Chandelure, what with the “after your attack” bit. You know, this might be way cleverer than I initially anticipated. A surprisingly good job.
I like the first attack as well, which does a nice job of having increasingly severe effects for each heads. The second attack seems a bit superfluous, but it does kind of work in synergy with the first one. Not very creative, though.
Some wording mistakes: “Defending” and “Benched” should be capitalised, “Paralysed” should be written in stupid American English, no “an” before [F], always use “a” for Energy symbols. Also, normally R is used for Fire, but since you made them red I’ll let it slide.
The HP is a bit high, and the card in general is probably a bit too good since it allows for some very easy and efficient set-ups, but for a first card it’s surprisingly believable. I’m also a fan of having more potent Basics, so no complaints here.
Creativity/Originality: 16/20
(You changed “before” to “after and it somehow became quite a neat mechanic ._.)
Wording: 11/15
(Capitalisation, “an”, “Paralysed”.)
Believability/Playability: 12/15
(A bit too good.)
Total: 39/50
GadgetJax:
GadgetJax said:Stage 2 / Aegislash /// HP140 [M]
Evolves from Doublade
__________________________________________
No. 681 Royal Sword Pokémon HT: 5'7" WT: 116.8 lbs.
__________________________________________
(Ability) Eraser Guard
If this Pokémon is your Active Pokémon and is damaged by an opponent's attack (even if this Pokémon is Knocked Out), flip a coin. If heads, discard a basic Energy attached to the Attacking Pokémon. If tails, discard a Special Energy attached to the Attacking Pokémon.
[M] [C] [C] Blade of the Fallen Hero 60+
Does 10 more damage for each [P] Pokémon (excluding Pokémon-EX) in your discard pile.
Weakness [R]x2 Resistance [P]x2
Retreat [C] [C] [C]
First of all: “excluding Pokémon-Ex” makes me love this card already. This doesn’t appear on nearly enough cards.
As someone who lived through the classic era, I’m always weary of things which discard Energy a bit too freely, but this does seem like a very interesting Ability. It forces some kind of risk minimisation from your opponent, which is always more fun than a more rudimentary luck-based effect.
You italicising the entire card makes it hard for me to judge if you italicised everything correctly, I’m deducing .5 points for cheating the system. The only other wording mistake I can find is that it should be “basic Energy cards” and Special Energy cards”, they provide Energy, which can be discarded, but the Energy itself isn’t basic or Special, the card is.
I can’t decided if the attack is way better than Flareon PLF’s or worse. Having it just be Psychic Pokémon (which interestingly enough isn’t Aegislash’s type, which makes building a very focussed deck harder) does balance it a bit. I do know that it might be a bit too good in combination with the Ability. Hard to tell nowadays...
Creativity/Originality: 14/20
(Fun take on an otherwise bland Ability, some very nice minor balancing.)
Wording: 12.5/15
(Should be “basic Energy Card”.)
Believability/Playability: 14.5/15
(Too good? I honestly don’t know. Good Stage2s are always welcome, though.)
Total: 41/50
GM DracLord:
GM DracLord said:
Let’s start with wording errors: you’ve misspelt “Misdreavus” x2, it’s “before your attack”, not “before you attack”, you didn’t italicise “(before your attack)”, I don’t think there’s supposed to be an “s” in “ex’s attack”, attack should be plural, “its own” not “it’s own” (which would mean “it is own”), “If you do” seems out of place since the power didn’t specify you doing anything, no space after a full stop, “less than damage counters” how many?, “Move as manage” I think you mean “many”?, forgot a “you” there, “from due to this attack’s effect” *cringe*, “instead discarding” forgot “of”, “discarding it to the discard pile” where else would you discard it?
Could you please proof-read next time?
Let’s see what we can salvage with creativity. We’ve seen attack-sharing effects before, most notably on Honchkrow MT, though having damage as a pay-off is pretty novel. Hit-and-Run has been around since Dark Alakazam. The attack seems original, but since it’s missing some vital information I’m not sure how to judge it. I’m assuming you meant something like “less than 6 damage counters” to keep it from being broken. Thematically, Spirit Share seems pretty creative, what with giving up a part of the soul to help a teammate.
Creativity/Originality: 14/20
(Pretty creative.)
Wording: 0/15
(It was pretty bad...)
Believability/Playability: 15/15
(Seems fine.)
Total: 29/50
Ice Espeon:
Not-Glaceon said:Basic Giratina EX HP190
NO. 487 Renegade Pokémon HT: 22'08" WT: 1433.0 lbs.
Spirit Puppet
This Pokémon can use the attacks of any Pokémon in play with a Spirit counter on it (both yours and your opponent's). The necessary Energy to use each of these attacks isless.
Spirit Link 30
If there are less than 2 Pokémon with a Spirit counter on it, you may place a Spirit counter on any Pokémon in play that doesn't already have a Spirit counter on it (yours or your opponent's). If you do, discard an Energy card attached to this Pokémon.
weaknessx2 resistance
-20 retreat
When a Pokémon-EX has been Knocked Out, your opponent takes 2 Prize cards.
Have a joke:
A nazi in charge of mining operations reports to Hitler saying there’s going to be structural problems if they keep mining minerals at this rate.
Hitler respons with “Well, then mine less!”
A grammer nazi bursts in: “Mine fewer!”.
To which Hitler responds “yes?”.
*Ahem* what I’m trying to say is that you should use “fewer” instead of “less”. Other than that, “(Both yours and your opponent’s)” and similar should be italicised x2, you’re missing “in play”, and it should be “with a spirit counter on them”. Other than that everything seems fine. Some of the wording has no real precedent and therefore enjoys the ultimate wording loophole.
About the card itself. I’m not a fan of introducing counters without explaining them. Especially in the recent era where everything has been dumbed down. That being said, they do sound like a fun mechanic which could lead to some creative and strategic play. I’m a bit puzzled as to why you’d limit them to 2, though, which seems a bit underwhelming (though perhaps a bit more balanced than if you’d have placed no restrictions at all). Being able to use the attacks of a Pokémon with a spirit counter on it seems like a nice addition as well. I’m not sure about the W/R, which, while technically correct when looking at the video games seems unprecedented in the TCG. The TCG tends to follow its own rules with regards to weakness and resistance, and usually focusses on the type of the card to decide. So picking non-conventional weaknesses/resistances for Ghost (such as no Weakness at all like the older cards) would’ve been bad enough, but picking unconventional weakness and resistance for Dragon on a P-typed card is going a bit too far.
Creativity/Originality: 17/20
(Spirit counters seem fun.)
Wording: 10/15
(Italicisation, wording, and being literally Hitler.)
Believability/Playability: 9/15
(The counters seem dubious in the current format, W/R.)
Total: 35.5/50
Keeper of Night:
Keeper of Night said:
Wording is a bit iffy, I’d have used “all Energy cards attached to the Defending Pokémon provide [P] Energy”, but I think it might be valid nevertheless. You didn’t capitalise “active”, though. The only other wording error I can spot is that you didn’t capitalise “evolves” in the text above the picture.
We’ve seen 3/4 Paralysis before, and we’ve seen bounce effects before, though both do fit thematically. Scared Stiff is very creative, but I’m not sure how doable this would be. I feel this would needlessly shut down or cripple otherwise perfectly viable decks and worst of all force people to play Psychic even more. This might honestly be the most annoying card ever if it were ever released, maybe after the old Slowking... Cards are designed to be fun, this card seems anything but.
Creativity/Originality: 16/20
(Creative power, quite thematic.)
Wording: 13.5/15
(Capitalisation errors.)
Believability/Playability: 11/15
(Very impactful power which seems too good and annoying.)
Total: 40.5/50
Lugia123:
Lugia123 said:
You forgot “Basic”, but that’s pretty minor in my opinion so you only get a -1 for this. Other errors are of course “Reatreat”, “opponents” x2, “active” and “knocked out” without a capitalisation and you forgot 2 commas (after “if your opponent attacks” and after “At the end of your opponent’s next turn”). Oh, and one big problem: Pokémon in your hand can’t be Knocked Out, so you’d need to have included a line which says what happens to this card if it attacks from your hand (which would be always). I’d have merged the Ability and attack and made it one big Ability which says that, if you did not attack during your last turn, you may discard this card from your hand to reflect an attack, after which you discard this card and your opponent gets to draw a prize card.
The card itself is a lot of fun, and quite reminiscent of other card games like Magic the Gathering. I’m not sure if I have anything to add. There’s a pretty big chance that this produces a stalemate, where both players are down to their last prize card and no player wants to attack because they know the other might activate this card. That alone definitely hurts the believability, on top of the fact that it goes against pretty much every Pokémon convention.
Creativity/Originality: 18/20
(Fun new mechanics = lots of points.)
Wording: 4.5/15
(Lots of minor errors, no rules clarification.)
Believability/Playability: 7/15
(Stalemate-inducing, pretty funky.)
Total: 29.5/50
Luispipe8:
Not-the-judge said:Stage 1/ Banette // HP90
Evolves from Shuppet
NO. 354/Marionette Pokémon/HT: 3'07"/WT: 27.6 lbs.
Sneaky Theft 40+
If your opponent's Active Pokémon has a Pokémon Tool card attached to it, this attack does 40 more damage and discard all Pokémon Tool cards attached to your opponent's Active Pokémon.
Cursed Blast 100
Switch 1 of your opponent's Benched Pokémon with your opponent's Active Pokémon. This attack does 100 damage to your opponent's new Active Pokémon. Discard allEnergy attached to this Pokémon. This Pokémon can't use Cursed Blast during your next turn.
Weakness:
Resistance:
Retreat:
Strong feelings of hatred turned a puppet into a Pokémon. If it opens its mouth, its cursed energy escapes.
AW01
AW01
It’s not really theft if you’re just throwing it away, is it? This sounds like Knock Off... Wait, you called it Knock Off in your description. At least Sneasel AQ and LA had the decency of shuffling it back in your opponent’s deck instead of outright breaking it. Cursed Blast as a name seems fine, though.
Wording is good as should be expected. Creativity is lacking
Other than that everything seems fine.
Creativity/Originality: 11/20
(Nice thematic fit, otherwise pretty lacking.)
Wording: 15/15
(Anything less and you would’ve never heard the end of it.)
Believability/Playability: 14/15
(Very good first attack paired with underwhelming second attack.)
Total: 40/50
Machamp The Champion:
Machamp The Champion said:STAGE 2 / Chandelure // HP130 [P]
Evolves from Lampent
NO. 609 Luring Pokémon HT: 3'03" WT: 75.6 lbs.
[Ability] Luring Call
Once during your turn (before your attack), you may discard cards until you have 2 cards in your hand. Then, if you have 2 in any combination of Litwick, Lampent, and Chandelure in your hand, you may reveal them, and search your deck for a card and put it into your hand. Shuffle your deck afterward. You may not use an Ability with the same name during your turn.
[P][P][C] Energy Specter 70+
If you have more basic Energy cards in your discard pile than your opponent, this attack does 50 more damage.
weakness [D] X2
resistance [F] -20
retreat [C][C]
The spirits burned up in its ominous flame lose their way and wander this world forever.
You didn’t italicise (before your attack), I’m deducting points for this mainly because I’m a horrible person. Other than that the wording seems fine enough, don’t worry.
I like the almost prohibitively expensive search Ability. It has a very nice trade-off and can’t be recklessly teched into any and all decks like most search abilities. It requires at least some prior set-up and quite some dedication to pull off and keep going, but if done successfully it could be very powerful. It’s always hard to judge how good a search ability will be, but I think you’ve done a good job of balancing it. The attack has some nice synergy going on, I don’t think we’ve seen that many discard pile dependant attacks which don’t require shuffling, let alone one which compares discard piles. I’m not sure what else to say, really. Great job!
Creativity/Originality: 18/20
(Fun, balanced search effect, creative attack, nice synergy.)
Wording: 14/15
(Me being a horrible person.)
Believability/Playability: 15/15
(No problems here, I think. A bit convoluted for the recent era, but that’s fine by me.)
Total: 47/50
Metal Gear BIDOOF:
Metal Gear HM-slave said:[Stage 1] Lampent - HP 90
Evolves from Litwick
– Heat the Soul
When this Pokémon is played from your hand to evolve Litwick, you may put 1 damage counter for eachEnergy attached to that Pokémon on each of your Opponent's Pokémon. You may not use an Ability with the same name during your turn.
- Spirit Kindling – 40
If this attack knocks out your opponent's Active Pokémon, search your deck for a card that evolves from this Pokémon and put it onto this Pokémon. (This counts as evolving this Pokémon.) Shuffle your deck afterward.
Weakness:x2
Resistance:-20
Retreat:
Wording for the Ability should be “When you play this Pokémon from your hand to evolve 1 of your Pokémon” or “When you play this Pokémon from your hand to evolve Litwick” (though that’d be weirdly specific). I’d reword the rest as “You may put 1 damage counters on each of your opponent's Pokémon for each [R] Energy attached to this Pokémon.”
Other than that it looks like a pretty neat card. I like the idea of forcing a decision between a speedy set-up (which Spirit Kindling provides) and waiting a few turns to increase the damage output of Heat the Soul. That being said, Heat the Soul is far too strong. Forretress FLF only does 1 damage and it’s a final stage. I’d have limited it to 1 Pokémon, which would’ve still made it very good in a Chandelure deck, but wouldn’t cause game-breaking in and of itself. Imagine pairing this with Devolution Spray or anything similar and some form of Energy acceleration (Emboar being the best case scenario, obviously). You wouldn’t even have to do direct damage, you’d just need to stall while having this thing on your bench.
Creativity/Originality: 15/20
(Fun mechanic, I don’t think we’ve seen Energy-dependant evolvution effects before.)
Wording: 12/15
(Wrong wording + unconventional wording in the Ability.)
Believability/Playability: 9/15
(Far too strong.)
Edit Penalty: -2 (sorry, the rules are the rules.)
Total: 34/50
Momaster12:
Mo master said:STAGE 2 || Gengar || HP110 || [P]
Evolves from Haunter
NO. 094 Shadow Pokémon HT: 4'11" WT: 89.3 lbs.
[Ability] Apparition Base
Once during your turn (before your attack), you may shuffle 1 [P] Pokémon from your discard pile back into your deck. If you do, discard 2 Item cards from your hand.
[P][P][C] Mischievous Shadows - 80-
You may discard the top card of your opponent's deck. If you do this attack does 80 damage minus 60 damage.
Weakness: [D] x2
Resistance: [F] -20
Retreat: [C]
It hides in shadows. It is said that if it is hiding, it cools the area by nearly 10 degrees Fahrenheit.
Let’s see, you didn’t italicise (before your attack), which I’ve been deducing points for because I’m despicable. Also, the “back” shouldn’t be there (see for example Musharna PHF) and you forgot a comma after “If you do”. That’s it, I think.
Shuffling back is always a nice effect, though I’m not sure 2 item cards would be worth the trouble. And Mischievous Shadows seems nice, but the damage reduction seems a bit much for a single discard. I feel I’ve seen Tyranitar do worse things in far less power-creeped formats. The HP seems on par with older Gengar cards, but it might still be correct after the BW power creep considering Pokémon like Gardevoir also didn’t really get affected by it. Giving Gengar retreat also seems at odd with most recent incarnations. While none of this is wrong, it all helps reinforce that this card seems awfully weak. Most of the pre-power creep Gengars did roughly the same amount of damage (60 + poison, 60 + Bench damage + switch), for roughly the same Energy requirements. Creativity is perhaps lacking as well, shuffling back is nice, as is the trade-off between discarding and damage, but neither seem terribly creative or as thoroughly worked out as I’d like them to be.
Creativity/Originality: 11/20
(Nothing surprising.)
Wording: 12/15
(Minor errors.)
Believability/Playability: 14/15
(Perhaps too underwhelming weak for a BW-on card.)
Total: 37/50
NameBlank:
NameBlank said:[Stage 1] Evolves from Phantump
TrevenantHP 120
NO. 709 Elder Tree Pokémon. HT: 4'11" WT: 156.5 lbs.
Natural Cure
If this Pokémon is affected by any Special Conditions, heal 20 damage from it in between turns.
Scare 80+
If the Defending Pokémon is a Pokémon-EX, this attack does 80 more damage, then this Pokémon is now Asleep.
Weaknessx2
Resistance-20
Retreat Cost
It can control trees at will. It will trap people who harm the forest, so they can never leave.
Hmmm, can’t say this is the most creative of cards. We’ve seen self-inflicted status conditions with beneficial effects before quite often, especially with Sleep (though most often on Snorlax). Healing between turns isn’t new either, and neither is countering Pokémon-EX. I’ afraid I can’t really give you a lot of points for creativity…
As for wording. The wording on Cresselia-EX for in between turns healing is slightly different, but I think your wording should be okay. The wording for the attack is wrong, though. There should be a full stop after “damage”, and a comma after “then”. Otherwise everything seems fine.
Creativity/Originality: 10/20
(Nothing new.)
Wording: 14/15
(Error in the attack effect.)
Believability/Playability: 15/15
(Seems fine.)
Edit Penalty: -2
Total: 37/50
Scorched Feathers:
Mr. Stoopid said:Stage 1 Mismagius HP100
Evolves from Misdreavus
NO.429 Magical Pokémon HT: 2'11" WT: 9.7 Ibs.
Magical Contract
Once during your turn (before your attack), if this Pokémon is your Active Pokémon, you may discard a Supporter card from your hand. If you do, during this turn, that card's effect becomes the effect of this card's Trickery attack.
Trickery 30
Mysterious Incantation 50
You and your opponent play Rock-Paper-Scissors. If you win, add 2 Supporter cards from your discard pile to your hand. If you lose, discard all Supporter cards in your hand.
weaknessx2 resistanceretreat
Its cries sound like incantations to torment the foe. It appears where you least expect it.
I’m sorry to say you did mess up on wording. When you move a card from the discard to your hand, you should use “put” and not “add”. You also discard cards “from” your hand, not “in” your hands.
There’s one major believability issue, which is that you don’t have to show your hand to your opponent to use Mysterious Incantation’s lose effect. This means there’s a possibility of foul play. This is the reason why whenever you have have to search your deck for a specific kind of card you have to show it to your opponent.
The Ability and Trickery end up being a severely nerfed version of Porygon 2’s GE power, which wasn’t tremendously popular in anything but unlimited, so it might be on the weak side. A Rock-Paper-Scissors game has been done quite a lot, so no points for originality there. Using a Supporter’s effect as the effect of an attack has also been done by Sableye SF. There’s some nice synergy going on between the attacks, though, so at least you’ve got that going for you.
Also, for some reason you used a capital i instead of an l to type “lbs.” I guess it makes no difference, but still, weird.
Creativity/Originality: 13/20
(It’s all been done before. But some nice synergy.)
Wording: 11/15
(“add”, “in”.)
Believability/Playability: 12/15
(No show-your-hand effect, slightly underwhelming.)
Total: 36/50
SeventhPrize:
SeventhPrize said:
Your Ability made me laugh, that’s always a good sign. You could’ve made it send both Pokémon to the Lost Zone and not allow either player to draw a prize card, though, just to add to the flavour, but still. I’m not sure how good the Ability is, considering it’s linked to an EX and requires an Energy. I’m assuming you don’t draw a prize card here, otherwise this would almost always be a brutal 2-for-2 with you getting to attack afterward.
The attack’s pretty fun as well, but it might be too easy to build a hit-and-run deck with. The flip hurts, but you’re still doing an easy 40 or more damage and running. There’s some nice synergy between hit-and-run and being able to make an opponent’s Pokémon disappear, though, so kudos for that.
As for wording, you didn’t italicise the (before your attack), you forgot the é in Pokémon x2, and “Discard” is vague, since it doesn’t say if this Knocks Out that Pokémon or not and whether or not you get to draw any prize cards.
Creativity/Originality: 17/20
(Creative and very thematic.)
Wording: 9.5/15
(Forgot clarification and some small errors.)
Believability/Playability: 14/15
(Might be too good, I don’t know.)
Total: 40.5/50
steffenka:
steffenka said:[Stage 1] Cofagrigus HP120 [P]
Evolves from Yamask
(Ability) Destiny Bond
If this Pokemon is Knocked Out by an attack, the Attacking Pokémon is also Knocked Out.
[P][C] Gold Toss 70
Flip a coin. If heads, your opponent’s Active Pokémon is now Paralyzed. If tails, choose 1 Energy card attached to your opponent’s Active Pokémon and discard it.
Weakness: [D] x2
Resistance: [F] -20
Retreat: [C][C]
They pretend to be elaborate coffins to teach lessons to grave robbers. Their bodies are covered in pure gold.
That ability’s going to cost you big time. Against a lot of decks it allows you to trade 1-for-1, or even 1-for-2 against Pokémon-EX, while requiring no set-up or commitment of your own. You could be setting up with this thing active waiting for your opponent to KO, either slowly with a small ‘mon they’re willing to sacrifice, or with a big ‘mon and wasting all of its set-up and Energy, so not quite a fair trade. There’s a reason why every single instance of an Ability or Poké-Power Knocking Out an opponent after being Knocked Out requires a coin flip.
Gold Toss, while still insanely good, feels mild in comparison. It’s sort of a no-lose coin toss, with both options stopping most Pokémon from attacking and possibly even retreating.
Wording seems fine in general, but the Ability should be “If this Pokémon is Knocked Out by damage from an attack, the Attacking Pokémon is Knocked Out.” because otherwise it’s unclear what exactly does and does not activate the Ability (does Poison, for example?).
Creativity/Originality: 9/20
(Way too standard.)
Wording: 12/15
(Ambiguous wording in Ability.)
Believability/Playability: 1/15
(Way way way too good.)
Total: 22/50
Reggie McGigas:
Reggie McGigas said:[Stage 2] Xamatter HP 130 [D]
Evolves from Dargost
[Ability] Antimatter
During your attack, you may do 40 more damage. If you do, this Pokémon has a Weakness of [P] during your opponent's next turn.
[D][C] Nether Power
Flip 3 coins. If exactly 1 of them are heads, this attack does 30 damage. If exactly 2 are heads, your opponent's Active Pokémon is now Confused. If all of them are heads, this attack does 50 damage and your opponent's Active Pokémon is now Confused.
Weakness: [D] x2
Resistance:
Retreat: [C]
Ugh. I don’t like doing this, but there is a precedent for fakemon so I guess this is allowed. Ugh again.
Changing types seems like an odd thing to add a positive trade-off on top of, especially if that type is Psychic, a type so many other Pokémon have weakness to. Unless you’re going for weakness (which would mean at most 10 additional damage, but most of the time 10 less damage) it seems completely pointless not to change, and even then you’d probably want to change..
The synergy with the attack is also pretty weird, since you’re unsure if you’re doing damage. This leads me to a far more serious problem with the wording, which doesn’t specify when during the attack you make this decision. This is pretty important, because presumably your decision whether to change or not depends on whether or not you’ll be doing damage. The whole attack in general seems rather random and thematically lacking.
There seems to have been a misunderstanding.
The wording for the Ability seems wrong. You’re not the one doing the damage, the attack is. There's also no such thing as a Weakness "of", it's a Weakness "to", the wording of the second part in general seems wrong, and should probably include "change" or "becomes". The only other mistake I can find in the wording for the attack is that 1 is singular, in which case one would use “is”.
changing weakness seems like a fun mechanic and provides a fun trade-off.
Also, based on previous Xamatter cards this... ugh.
If you use a Fakemon, at the very least add a Pokédex entry.
Creativity/Originality: 16/20
(Fakemon, ugh.)
Wording: 9/15
(“is”, problems with wording Ability.)
Believability/Playability: 15/15
(
Total: 40/50
Salamencetrainer34:
Salamencetrainer34 said:
Let’s go through all the wording errors first: wording should be: “When you play this Pokémon from your hand to evolve 1 of your Pokémon,” “Pokémon” not “pokemon” x6, “Benched,” “Active,” “Defending,” “Condition,” “Special,” Energy” x2, “Froslass,” and “Bench” should be capitalised, “opponent’s” is missing an apostrophe x3, “in any way you like” not “in any way you wish,” “Special Energy Card” not “Special Energy” (Energies themselves are never special), wording should be “if you do, this attack does 50 more damage”, use “a” instead of “1”, “60+ more damage” the + is redundant, you added a space before a comma, and suddenly you’re using “Froslass” instead of “this Pokémon” x2. I think that’s enough. I hope for your sake and my sanity that this is everything.
Chilling Glare is far too powerful when compared to other evolve effects. You have the power of one of the absolute best cards ever, Luxray GL LvX, damage spread on par with Forretress FLF, and insta-poison or paralysis to boot, which would’ve been broken by itself. The lament of the icy cave is boring but pretty strong nevertheless. Powerful ice seems random, ridiculously pricey and somewhat boring. I’m not sure what else to say here. You can’t just add random effects and hope to win some creativity points.
...Resistance to Metal? ._.
If you add a power or attack, try and find similar versions and compare how powerful they are. If yours is far more powerful than any of them, you might need to tone it down. Otherwise you end up with cards like this, which would end up 4 times in any deck, no questions asked. And please, please, please proofread. It saves me a lot of trouble and gives you a lot more points.
Creativity/Originality: 8/20
(It’s something.)
Wording: 0/15
(Help.)
Believability/Playability: 2/15
(Help.)
Edit Penalty: -2 (Oh God.)
Total: 8/50
Tails:
Dawnfanboy said:Basic Rotom HP: 80
Plasma Pokemon - 1'00" - 0.7 lbs.
PokeAbility: Infiltration
Once during your turn (before your attack) you can use this Ability. Select an-type Pokemon on your bench and Rotom becomes that Pokemon. Do not pay any Energy costs and Rotom cannot use any of the selected cards attack effects. This Ability doesn't work if Rotom is affected by a Special Condition.
Spooky Bolt 30
Flip a coin. If heads, Defending Pokemon is now Paralyzed.
Machine Override 70
Depending on the type of type of Energy used for the, this attack becomes that type. (This attack's type cannot be converted to Colorless, though.)
Weakness-x2
Resistance-
Retreat Cost-
Research continues on this Pokemon, which could be the power source for a unique motor.
Oh God, that Ability ._.
You don’t simply become a Pokémon without a card full of elaborations, it’s why they did Ditto Base Set once and only once: it’s far too complex a thing to do. How long do you stay that Pokémon? What if that Pokémon changes? Can Rotom evolve? Does that Pokémon even stay in play? I’m afraid I don’t understand it fully, but from what I can tell it’s broken beyond belief. Copy a Benched Pokémon-EX, don’t pay for its energy costs and don’t apply any possible negative effects? Is there any format in which this wouldn’t be completely game-breaking?
Also, attacks don’t have types, so that also hurts believability. Should’ve been Rotom’s type which changes during the attack. Also, you forgot to add a “-20” or something to the Resistance. The Special Condition clause also hasn’t been used in ages, I’m not sure why you decided to bring it back.
Let’s go through all the wording mistakes: it’s “Ability”, not “PokeAbility”, no comma after (before your attack), (before your attack) should be italicised, every type starts with a consonant, so never use “an”, use
Now for something positive: Machine Override, if a bit oddly named, sounds like quite an interesting concept. Badly worded and explained, yes, but interesting none the less. It’s subtly different from “Choose a Basic Energy card attached to this Pokémon, this Pokémon becomes that type until the end of your turn.”, I like it. Infiltration is, I assume, a reference to how Rotom can take over objects and the likes, so I guess that’s thematically fitting.
Creativity/Originality: 13/20
(Interesting type-change mechanic, thematic.)
Wording: 0/15
(I’m sorry, but this was a train wreck. Please do some research next time.)
Believability/Playability: 1/15
(That ability ._.)
Total: 14/50
3rd Place: Our 3rd place winner is GadgetJax and is well-made Aegislash, earning him 41/50 points.
2nd Place: Second place goes to bbninjas, who earned 43.5/50 points thanks to his very funky Bannette-EX.
1st Place: And the champion is of course Machamp the Champion, whose Chandelure crushed the competition and got him an incredibly high 47/50 points.[/hr]
Last edited by a moderator:
