Card of the Week Contest #404: A la Mode

Also, sdfkjgh, that doesn't technically work. Flavor words are like ability words or flavor text in that they can't be referenced by cards or rules text. You'd want anchor words in this case.

@The Harlequin: Big thanks for your efforts, but I'm pretty sure my wording is fine

You're talking like the Sieges, right?  Dangit, I thought so.  See, this was originally designed with them in mind.  It can easily be fixed by changing the wording to "chooses one", right?

My entry. This card is not meant to be taken seriously in the slightest. It's made for multiplayer un-games. I just like the thought of it.

Changelog: Add 1337 hacking skills.

New Entry

For reference: Spy Network.
Also honestly, looking at Peek I don't think even adding a cantrip would be enough. 

I think "choose one or both" for U would be passable, not necessarily great, but either effect could fit on a charm so it's not far off. Or add "scry N" and make it a charm for U?

I guess that's true Daij. I was initially going to only allow one choice, but made a last minute decision to go with one or both to fit better with the way the Scrying spell works in DnD.
Thanks all for the feedback. I will definitely work on tuning it.

Another clown-slap-put one's oar in-seasson from your's truely
My oppinion -- So if ya don't agree with it it's fine by me.

Will edit it if the schedule allowes 

Grapple X
As already said -- Pls upload it in a way that ppl dont need a magnifying glass to read your card (if they aren't logged in and can load the bigger verson from the forum). Give ppl who aren't part of this forum the change to read stuff.
But the card itself
"Death" as a name makes sense for the first one and fits the effect -- But the name don't feel mono-w to me. "Death" isn't realy something that siuts mono-w. Therefore i would take the more selfless, protective approach with "guarding" or "protecting" -- fits w better
I don't think "glory" fits the 2nd one. it's more like "deflect" or "redirect" for me. Also "to you" feels kinda wrong "to its controller" feels more mtg-like imo. But i don't see any situation where that would be mono w in this itteration. It feels more like a cheating system to survive, no matter the cost. And that would be mono-b in my book. :-)

sdfkjgh
I don't get it. At all. Not how it works, because it does indeed work. It feels so random to me.
At least for me it does a bad job at explaining itself (Well, a render may help explain it a bit better -- Pictures are kinda great at that) -- So may ya pls enlighten me? :-)

Vunik
"Level Up" already exists as a key word -- So that may or may not cause some confusion in the long run. Also leveling feeld kinda meh as a search effect -- More like a stat gain for ya party imo.
"Identify..." seams alright.

vizionarius
Over all a good and self-explanatory design. I like it.

BinaryBolas
I get an military vibe from this one -- so therefore military flavor words may be a better fit.
Exploring -- For me, exploring should have to do something with lands. Filtering in the context of a fortress would fit something like "Adjust Strategy" .
Expand -- Increasing the manpower of ya arms. i get it -- but in the theme if a fortress i would use a more militay flavor -- "recruiting" or something like that. "Expand Influence" could also work.
Exploit -- Armies exploit the land for ressources, so that fits, but I would just use lands in here. Ya can't exploit what doesn't have anything to get exploited.
Exterminate -- Far to radical for what ya card does. More like a "Artillery Blast" or a "Attack Maneuver"

viriss
Simple. And not in a bad way.
But the flavour boggles me a bit
the first ability is black, no douth with that (ya didn't help him)
But 2nd one is more white to me because it reflects generosity imo (ya helped him and he was happy to be able to stay alife)

Jartis
"Level up" is also an existing keyword -- so that may or may not cause some confusion in the future.
The counter placing wording is strange and sounds kinda wrong (and yes, i know that it is one way to word it). This wording is exclusivly used on planeswalkers (and one random spell).
The more widely used wording would be "(You may) Put two +1/+1 counters on target creature (you control)"

Fermat
I would just put a small restriction onto the search effect -- "mana value 4 or less" or something like that. Generic searcher may or may not be kinda dangerous depending on the format.

Daij_Djan
A silver border may be required ;-)
And i'm missing the chicken. WHERE IS HIS CHICKEN??? ;-)

bastardneko
I assume that there are more funny numberes out there that require your aid (1337, 42, 666, 777, ... ; ya may find some more) ;-)

damagicgeek
ya are missing somes spaces ;-) "XXX -- XXX"
33% for a +1
33% for a -3
33% for a -1 and a bit of a filter
Bad odds. I gonna play tormenting voice or chart a course instead :-)

inverness
"Choose one or more --
)...
)...
)...
For each mode chosen, create a Treasure token." 

"Beg" feels kinda off -- 1 life is kinda not worth the efford. Well, "Get a (one) life"-meme embraced in here, but still.
Based on my assumtion, creating a treasure on its own should be worth about 1/2 to 3/4 of one mana.
And life gained for 1 mana in W would be about 3 (lucky offering -- gain with upside, powercreaps sanctify, pure lifegain aka chaplains blessing also exists). I would go with 3 life for "Beg".
"Borrow" feels more like "Share" or "Your Cut" of a deal. You never give the treasure back in the first place :-)
"Steal" is reasonable.

the5lacker
"peer/peek through" could also fit.
Would put the creature tapped into play. Just in case :-)
Over all a nice creation.

Thanks for the detailed feedback!  I took into consideration what you said and updated my card.  It now uses Escalate for the modal choices, as I figured that would make for an interesting use of the mechanic.  I also updated "Borrow" to be more reflective of the flavor.