This card played with Chains of Meph. is an extremely brutal combo that may well be unrecoverable. Take into account that it's cheap and in the same color...

I say bump the mana cost by 2 if your gonna make it at all.

Don't most cards like this, these days anyway, find 4 copies? What'd be the harm in finding 4 copies for the graveyard?

I, personally, would use this template:

Humble Squireship
W
Enchant Creature
Fading 1
Whenever ~this~ has no fade counters, put a +1/+1 counter on enchanted creature, it gains "attacking doesn't cause this creature to tap.", and is a Squire in addition to its creature types. (This effect doesn't end at end of turn.)

Also, I would suggest reducing the cost of the rare card by 1 and finding a different mechanic than Double Strike. It not only seems excessive (as in a "you win" card) but also just doesn't seem to fit the theme right. Giving the knight both abilities may well be the best answer, though I imagine there is a white ability out there that is being overlooked (protection or pump maybe).

No way. I still completely disagree with this card unless there is no choice as to which spells to counter. In it's current incarnation, this is too powerful and can be used on the same spell all three times.
The initial arguments against this card have NOT been dropped. I can't let this card through until it is a forced counter and can only be used once per spell. Period.

No way, this feels too good to me.

First it's reusable search (even if it is just for treasure cards) and second it allows a player to see their entire library, essentially allowing them to plan all thier plays for the rest of the game. No where does the card say shuffle.

Too strong my friend.
1: make it like Enlightened - on top of library.
2: add the word shuffle.

Then maybe it's an ok card.

As it stands now Matt, the hunter can steal a player's entire "collection" of treasure permanents over a matter of just a few turns. I think that you're going a bad route by doing this card as you're punishing players for playing treasure cards more than you're rewarding them (see also Snow-covered Land).
Back the power off on the card and it may be just fine.

I don't see this so much as messing with the flow of time, Matt, as this card would be more like a Haste effect for the player and all his creatures. The name would need to be completely changed, but this card is very nearly decent, though I think still too powerful (add 1 to the cost).

Flavor wise, some kind of accelerant or frenzy is induced which causes the player and all of his creatures to go all out against the opponent, but then they must hibernate to make up for the spent energy.

I think the card would be must better and less abusable like this:
Induced Frenzy
RG
Sorcery
Take an extra turn after this one. You may not play spells (*or abilities? *or lands?) during that turn. After that turn, all opponents gain an additional turn after theirs.

This card, I think, might be balanced. And now it is not abusable by combo or prison decks (which the version quoted would easily be abused by).

Monarch would be very flavorful.

This could probably even be one cheaper. I don't think that there are many "millstone" cards that cost more than 3, and this is no stronger than any of the others.

Made the card far more wordy, but less complicated and much more flavorful.
I like this card now.

Could anyone suggest a proper wording for this card that would not involve the maximum in lines of text?

Frankly, I've grown to like the names, so I don't care whether it makes sense "chemically".
24 hours

If that is indeed the case, I would suggest the following framework. This is your basic combo-player's nightmare deck.

Sharazad, Divine Intervention, Jester's Cap, Memory Jar & other draw 7's, Tinker, Stasis, some artifact recursion (Welder would be optimum cruelty).

The basic idea is that you deconstruct the opponent's entire deck through Cap recursion over several subgames, until they have nothing left but lands. Then you end all subgames as ties through Intervention, and break the Stasis lock and let the non-combo players enjoy the actual game. It may take some time, but it teaches a serious lesson.

Make no mistake, you may well get punched in the face for playing this deck.

I was thinking something along these lines:

Time Waltz
RG
Sorcery
This card is a horrible idea. Close it now.

Sorry for the blatant sarcasm, but this card is completely unbalanceable. It is undercosted and there is no drawback you can give it to fix that, unless you find one so bad that it makes the card useless.

Again: This card will never be balanced. It will either be broken and too good, or useless and too bad.

OOOoohh. I misunderstood. I thought it was one card per upkeep paid. Is it actually one card per mana in the upkeep paid? (like if you pay the first upkeep you get 2 cards, the second gets you 4...) The card could be confusing as worded, I mean I was confused. I think lowering the CU to 1 would eliminate confusion.

I'm not sure I like the "during each upkeep" idea, but I do love allowing any player to add the counters... Although I like just about anything that makes a card more interesting in multiplayer.

Fair enough. I can deem these acceptable.

48 Hours?

I think Cumulative Upkeep 1 would be just fine really.

If you're going for maximum annoyance in multiplayer, you have not even begun to hit the top of the iceberg...
First of all, any well thought out Sharazad deck will also include Jester's Caps with methods to recur them (which are plentiful in white) and the truely annoying Divine Intervention (at least I think that's the name of the card which causes the game to become a draw). There are several other cards to use, but those are must includes for maximum "pain in the ass" mode.

Bidding cards have been notoriously long in the text department... Who's to say this isn't a silent auction?

I get your point, but the text is already long as it is, adding the bidding mechanic would make this card almost too long to print.

This still makes every draw spell into a "draw 2 and discard one," which is much better than it was in the first place.
If you want to make this truly fair, then make it that they discard both cards if they don't pay the cost... then I would say that this is just about do-able. Although I think it completely takes out the broken aspect if they would have to sacrifice the land instead.

There, now that that's taken care of: Is the CMC and activation cost ok or does it need adjustment? (I costed this very agressively)
Is the ability fair as worded? (I think that this card is prone to cheating problems... You'd have to have each person secretly chose a number and public chose the creature. Which I would not want to put in as card text or reminder text.)
Is the ability different enough to warrant a card? (I think definetely so.)
Is the ability completely unfair in multiplayer or limited?

Adamant, no. Would I prefer it, yes. I just don't want to be too trite in naming these. I don't want something simple and stupid like "Lava Elemental" or the like. You get the idea.

Feel free to adjust the creature type, but don't give me something moronic and easy.

Matt: didn't you do a whole little study on Volcanoes and volcanic adjectives? Would any of those fit to these cards?

I hadn't even noticed that I'd made a "tapping enchantment".
But there it is...

Any ideas on how to eliminate the tapping? Personally, I was thinking that this would be insane, and very "red", if we just took out the tap and let any player use the ability, an number of times a turn. Although, maybe once per turn per person is a better option.

Why would the wording, "Whenever a spell is played" work? I see no rules reason to use the word "stack" on this card, and it looks really ugly with it on there.

Well, I'd considered that wording. But, aside from the fact that it would be a lot more complex to word it like that (and add at least another line of text), this version is alot more interesting in multiplayer.

I love making cards which are fine in standard, but infinetely fun in multiplayer.

Slave Auction
Enchantment
1R
R,T: Each player chooses a number and a creature an opponent controls. Each player looses life equal to the number they chose and the player who chose the highest number gains control of all chosen creatures.

The wording is a little complicated, but the flavor is beautiful. The randomness and "auction" effect are both in flavor for red, so I think this baby is pretty well balanced. I costed it very aggressively, so I expect the CC to come into question.

Current Wording:
Slave Auction
1R
Enchantment
R: Each player chooses a creature an opponent controls. Each player then may then pay one life, all players which paid may repeat this process until only one player pays this cost. The last player to pay life gains control of all chosen creatures. Play this ability only once per turn and only when you could play a sorcery.

Thank you. I've been having a horribly time trying to come up with good names lately.

I came up with names. They could be better, but I'm fairly tapped out on the names front.

48 Hours

I don't know if this was your intent or not, but couldn't the opponent just cast any old draw spell on you in response to this and utterly ruin you? Just a question.