This is my general ranking, though I'm a stickler for format and balance.
1—The card is flawed. There are multiple formatting errors (e.g. a keyword is missing; there are multiple spelling mistakes). Competition criteria are ignored or clearly twisted in a way not intended. Little to no thought has been put into mechanics, flavour, and balance (e.g. the card outright breaks the game; I cannot identify the card by its art alone). The card is not functional.
2 — The card is satisfactory. There are no formatting errors. If there are errors, they are minor (e.g.Choose One is followed by a colon instead of a dash). Competition criteria are met, but not expanded on in an interesting way. Thought has been put into mechanics and balance. The card has some flavour (e.g. the art is appropriate for the name, but the effect's connection is unclear). The card is pack-filler at worst and functional at best.
3 — The card is good. There are no formatting errors. Competition criteria are met and the card uses them in an interesting way. Serious thought has been put into mechanics and balance. The card is flavourful (e.g. the art, name, and effect are all clearly related). The card would be experimented with and may see play.
4 — The card is excellent. There are no formatting errors. Competition criteria are met and the card uses them in an innovative way. Effort has been put into mechanics and balance. The card is flavourful. The card would definitely see play.
5 — The card is exemplary. There are no formatting errors, and the effect text has clearly been tidied up. Competition criteria are met and the card uses them to pioneer a new archetype or play-style, or to radically improve existing ones. Serious time and effort have been put into mechanics and balance. The card is exceptionally flavourful (e.g. the effect replicates a World of Warcraft ability). The card would definitely see play, and I would craft it in Gold.
3 days seems like enough time to me. Can’t we make that the cut off?
@Live4vrRdieTryn This is isn't a thread that constantly requires attention, but something that people should be able to do when they feel like it. The only reason I bumped is because there seems to have been some momentum lately and I genuinely thought torto123 hadn't seen it was their turn.
I agree with DestroyerR that a week is ample time to give someone, and can second that there have been far longer down-times than this. Maybe they need the time to think of something, or perhaps they have other things going on but would still like the opportunity to set the next riddle. I understand that for others it means waiting, but there are a lot of non-Hearthstone puzzles to fill one's time with whilst this thread is quiet :)
These are some awesome points, thanks for that KANSAS!
In terms of the description box, I used it to post flavour text, followed by a brief-to-mid-length description of my thought process behind the card. In particular, I would use it to stress flavour. Oftentimes, I see a card and its effect and sort of get where the creator was coming from, but not really. This is especially true for cards that use existing WoW characters or creatures. I don't play WoW, and I know if I would choose to use a character from the lore, I would research it first and mention its connection to the card in HS.
If I may add a little to your point about Presentation....
Hearthstone exists within a particular universe. Although it has diverged from Warcraft significantly, Hearthstone is still rooted within its universe. The characters and critters that appear could feasibly appear in WoW or its lore in some form. One might be tempted to simply 'create a card' that would be cool in a card game, but remember that you're creating a Hearthstone (Heroes of Warcraft) card. You don't need to be an expert on it by any means, but having even a cursory understanding can help make your card seem extra realistic, especially when designing Legendaries.
Is it... Ironhide Direhorn?
Ey, nice on R! Over to you :)
Sorry I've been quiet, uni's restarted again to keep me busy.
Loving the teamwork here :) anchorm4n's on the ball with Jaffa the city. Another hint: Both letter and fever can be paired with a certain colour.
Not Undercity Huckster.
Letter and fever refer to the first word in the name, Jaffa and Urban the second.
Nope, but the card does have two words in its name
None of the above I'm afraid; there is no anagram here either.
The words all relate, in some way, to the card's name.
Thanks @PopeNeia, nice riddle :)
As for mine:
Letter, Jaffa, fever, Urban
Heed these words to pull back the curtain
Is it... Eadric the Pure?
This is my general ranking, though I'm a stickler for format and balance.
1 — The card is flawed. There are multiple formatting errors (e.g. a keyword is missing; there are multiple spelling mistakes). Competition criteria are ignored or clearly twisted in a way not intended. Little to no thought has been put into mechanics, flavour, and balance (e.g. the card outright breaks the game; I cannot identify the card by its art alone). The card is not functional.
2 — The card is satisfactory. There are no formatting errors. If there are errors, they are minor (e.g. Choose One is followed by a colon instead of a dash). Competition criteria are met, but not expanded on in an interesting way. Thought has been put into mechanics and balance. The card has some flavour (e.g. the art is appropriate for the name, but the effect's connection is unclear). The card is pack-filler at worst and functional at best.
3 — The card is good. There are no formatting errors. Competition criteria are met and the card uses them in an interesting way. Serious thought has been put into mechanics and balance. The card is flavourful (e.g. the art, name, and effect are all clearly related). The card would be experimented with and may see play.
4 — The card is excellent. There are no formatting errors. Competition criteria are met and the card uses them in an innovative way. Effort has been put into mechanics and balance. The card is flavourful. The card would definitely see play.
5 — The card is exemplary. There are no formatting errors, and the effect text has clearly been tidied up. Competition criteria are met and the card uses them to pioneer a new archetype or play-style, or to radically improve existing ones. Serious time and effort have been put into mechanics and balance. The card is exceptionally flavourful (e.g. the effect replicates a World of Warcraft ability). The card would definitely see play, and I would craft it in Gold.
Is it... Judicious Junior? :P
Dude ...
Uncool.
Is it... C'Thun?
From what I've seen they're not necessarily excluded, just uncommon since they're much more obscure, especially the ones from boss runs.
Is it... Mindrender Illucia?
@Live4vrRdieTryn This is isn't a thread that constantly requires attention, but something that people should be able to do when they feel like it. The only reason I bumped is because there seems to have been some momentum lately and I genuinely thought torto123 hadn't seen it was their turn.
I agree with DestroyerR that a week is ample time to give someone, and can second that there have been far longer down-times than this. Maybe they need the time to think of something, or perhaps they have other things going on but would still like the opportunity to set the next riddle. I understand that for others it means waiting, but there are a lot of non-Hearthstone puzzles to fill one's time with whilst this thread is quiet :)
These are some awesome points, thanks for that KANSAS!
In terms of the description box, I used it to post flavour text, followed by a brief-to-mid-length description of my thought process behind the card. In particular, I would use it to stress flavour. Oftentimes, I see a card and its effect and sort of get where the creator was coming from, but not really. This is especially true for cards that use existing WoW characters or creatures. I don't play WoW, and I know if I would choose to use a character from the lore, I would research it first and mention its connection to the card in HS.
If I may add a little to your point about Presentation....
Hearthstone exists within a particular universe. Although it has diverged from Warcraft significantly, Hearthstone is still rooted within its universe. The characters and critters that appear could feasibly appear in WoW or its lore in some form. One might be tempted to simply 'create a card' that would be cool in a card game, but remember that you're creating a Hearthstone (Heroes of Warcraft) card. You don't need to be an expert on it by any means, but having even a cursory understanding can help make your card seem extra realistic, especially when designing Legendaries.
Just bumping the thread in case @torto123 hasn't seen it :)
Is it... Majordomo Executus?
Is it... Camouflaged Dirigible?
Balls. Sorry DestroyerR :/
Not sure how to proceed, but I'm more than happy to hand over my next turn to you if I correctly guess.