The MCC Discussion Thread

[Gateways7]

Comment related to my judging in Round 3 -

Quality 1.5/3 – Should just be "until end of turn" – no "the" (-0.5). Also, you're really not supposed to write anything other than your post, especially if it seems to be intended to sway the judging rather than just for fun (-1). You've been penalized for this before, so I know you know the rule.

I'd like to ask that this rule be added into the official rubric of the challenges, because as written, the only way to find this information is to go through a deep dive on the guidelines, when every other thing that can get you docked points is explicitly mentioned in the rubric. (And although I'm relatively new here, I have to ask: Why is it necessary for this rule to exist? Seems to me the only thing it does is preventing quality feedback and giving people advice on how to design better. Just want to know, not trying to call people out or anything.)

[bravelion83]

Of course in the absence of anyone else being able to do it I will step up.

If it's not a problem to you, I am more than willing to do it again. I've also already run back to back MCC months before. At least here there's a month in between. I'd be totally willing to step up and post the judge signup thread already if you agree. I just didn't want to take it away from Rithaniel or other (*) people that might have been interested in hosting. I was thinking that in the absence of other (*) volunteers, I could do it for October and Rithaniel at a later time whenever it's more comfortable to him. Obviously, I would also be there to help him if he needs. I'm currently unemployed, so (unfortunately) I have all the time in the world to run October.

* Here "other" means "different from both me and you", including you too, as you're doing it this month.

---

About what [mention]Gateways7[/mention] pointed out and asked:

Comment related to my judging in Round 3 -

Quality 1.5/3 – Should just be "until end of turn" – no "the" (-0.5). Also, you're really not supposed to write anything other than your post, especially if it seems to be intended to sway the judging rather than just for fun (-1). You've been penalized for this before, so I know you know the rule.

I'd like to ask that this rule be added into the official rubric of the challenges, because as written, the only way to find this information is to go through a deep dive on the guidelines, when every other thing that can get you docked points is explicitly mentioned in the rubric. (And although I'm relatively new here, I have to ask: Why is it necessary for this rule to exist? Seems to me the only thing it does is preventing quality feedback and giving people advice on how to design better. Just want to know, not trying to call people out or anything.)

I suppose what you're referring to here is the "don't post anything but the text card in your submission post", which actually is "don't post anything but the text card and an optional render in addition to it in your submission post". Renders are allowed, they're the only thing allowed in the submission post in addition to the required text card. If you include a render, it will just be ignored in the judgment. Nobody should be penalized for including renders. As for why it exists, that's always been the rule both in the MCC and the FCC that ran before it. I was only a lurker on MTGSalvation back then, but I had already started following it from the shadow realm, so I do know that to be the case. It's essentially a thing that has been grandfathered it from a time when a lot of people used to post design notes and other things that could influence judgments. The card has to be able to speak for itself, without any additional explanations, notes, or whatever. That's the logic behind the rule. As you said yourself, it's already in the guidelines, so I don't need to make a note to add it in a future update. It's already there, as it's always been.

Just to be clear, you haven't been penalized for including a render. That's allowed (as long as you give proper credit to the artist). The problematic part of your submission post is this:

Pair with Faith's Reward, Gerrard Weatherlight Hero, Open the Vaults, Second Sunrise, Splendid Reclamation, Brought Back, or Thrilling Encore for the value plays.

This is what you shouldn't have included. You should let your judge figure out the relevant interactions by themselves. Only after they've posted their judgment, if you feel like the judge has missed something important about your card, you can politely point it out to them either here or via pm. Probably a pm is best. Just remember to do it in a polite and civil way, and also remember that the judge may adjust their judgment based on whatever you pointed out to them, but they're not required to do so, and anyway this all should happen before the judging deadline. Technically, judgments become final in the moment of the judging deadline.

I would have no problems adding a single sentence at the end of the rubric explaining this, as long as it's just an addition and not a substitution, and as long as nothing else, including scores, is modified. Do others feel like such an addition is needed?

[slimytrout]

Both of my brackets are posted now.

[bravelion83]

My own judgments (and prerelease stories, if you care about those) have been posted too here in the round thread.

Should I go ahead and post the judge signup thread for October already?

[void_nothing]

Go right ahead and do so.

[bravelion83]

I've just finished rereading my judgments for typos and fixing them. Going to prepare it right now and I'll post it as soon as I have it done. It shouldn't take more than a few minutes from this post.

EDIT: it's up. The October MCC and our own story on the plane of Eldraine begin now! Who knows what adventures this beautiful place has in store for us this month? Well, technically I do... Will you and your courage be as adamant as to join me through them? We'll share everything, stories, battles, and even our food! Knights of all courts of the realm, this is your call to arms!

EDIT: Round 1 is up. Maybe a few hours early, but I figured out that wouldn't hurt. Are you ready to live your own personal adventure on this new wonderful plane?

[archemediesx]

Can i get an example of how you expect Adventure cards templated please.

[bravelion83]

Can i get an example of how you expect Adventure cards templated please.

It has been there since I first posted the round. Go to Clarifications spoiler > Main Challenge option-specific clarifications > Adventure.
For everybody's convenience, here is the relevant part:

• Q: How should I format my adventurer card?
A: Just like if it were a split card. Write the creature part as a normal text card, then add a separator below it (a double forward slash, //, is advised), and then write the Adventure part as it would be written on the left side of a real adventurer card's text box. In the Adventure part, don't forget the "Adventure" subtype and not only you can not put rarity in, but you should not. On real adventurer cards, there is no colored expansion symbol on the type line of the Adventure part.

For example, Flaxen Intruder would be written out like follows.

Flaxen Intruder G
Creature — Human Berserker (U)
Whenever Flaxen Intruder deals combat damage to a player, you may sacrifice it. When you do, destroy target artifact or enchantment.
The middle blade was just right.
1/2

//

Welcome Home 5GG
Sorcery — Adventure
Create three 2/2 green Bear creature tokens. (Then exile this card. You may cast the creature later from exile.)

[SecretInfiltrator]

Am I the only one who missed the unannounced September MCC Finals? I only noticed the thread, because it was the last on the page, when I scrolled down and noticed, it was about to fall off the front page. At the time I was about to ask whether it was going to go up soon. Would have been weird with only one person showing up for the finals. : )

[bravelion83]

My judgments for the final round of September have been posted.

A reminder that the design deadline for October Round 1 is tomorrow night for now. Seeing the not very high participation, I might leave the round open if we don't have at the very least two more entries (15 total) by this time tomorrow. We'll see. If you're pondering whether you want to enter the contest or not, please do! This is exactly the right moment!

[void_nothing]

My final judgments for September will be delayed until tomorrow due to a family need.

[void_nothing]

Congratulations to September's MCC winner, Rithaniel!

[Flatline]

Congratulations Rithaniel!

I'm going to get a 0 for quality this round. I clearly did not read the adventure formatting rules in the clarifications. I wasn't really planning on participating this month, but decided to submit a card at the (later than) last second. I think I get why bravelion wants the creature half to come before the adventure half, but my brain really wants it to be the other way around, because that way it follows the order in which you want to cast the two halves of the card.

[bravelion83]

I'll add myself to the congratulations to Rithaniel as well!

My judgments for October Round 1 have been posted. I have a tie for fourth place, so five players from my bracket advance.

And one of the tied players is you, [mention]Flatline[/mention]. You didn't get a zero in Quality, after all there were only two things that didn't respect what I had said in the (admittedly long) clarifications, and deducting -0.5 twice leaves you with 2 points there. You shouldn't worry about it too much. Believe it or not, I had seriously considered that option too (asking for the Adventure to come before the creature because it's the order in which you cast them), but then I went with creature first for two reasons. First, the card has only the creature characteristics if it's in any zone other than the stack when cast as an Adventure, so the creature part is "more important" in a sense. If you picture an adventurer card in your hand or graveyard, for example, it's just a creature, so it's like if the Adventure wasn't there on the card at all. Second, I checked how they did it on Gatherer and saw that the mothership itself mentions the creature first. But be aware that I did seriously think about the other option too. In the end I made the call that I made but I can definitely see reasons why you might want to do it in the other way. Everything's fine. And you shouldn't have to worry about it again for the rest of the month...

[Rithaniel]

Thanks for the congratulations, guys! It was a fun month.

This particular round was nerve-wracking. I knew that the competition was gonna be stout with SecretInfiltrator, Sagharri, and barbecube around, and the challenge didn't give me any ideas right off the bat. It was almost the deadline before I started developing an idea I was happy with. The first three rounds I made colored artifacts, so I was inclined to make another colored artifact this round, but ultimately opted not to. Colored artifacts are still relatively new and not quite ready for such bizarre mana costs. You guys picked up on the cue I took from the Ultimatum cycle, but I also got inspiration from the Lorwyn Command cycle (Also, Command, Ultimatum, and Dictum are all synonyms. Different connotations, but they are all 'orders'). The original was a "choose three" spell with five very simple modes, but I thought that might end up uninteresting and potentially inelegant, so I decided to streamline it and make the modes fewer, but more interesting. I would suspect that the most interesting part of the overall design is the asymmetry of each mode. "You lose some life, but I gain twice that much."

[kwanyeegor-ii]

excuse me, but my card for October round 1 has a mistake in judgment.

it was not my best work. I won't argue it getting a low score. but not every choice in a card has to be a target. I should not have quality points docked for not using target in the adamant part of my card because otherwise it would not work as intended. If it used target you could not gain control of the tokens the card produces

I don't want future contestants getting low scores because a judge doesn't know the templating/rules

[void_nothing]

Yes - I'm hesitant to say this at the moment as I'm a contestant this month but as mod I will say: judges, please check your work in the objective portion (that is, Quality) of the score. If you're not sure about how an effect is or should be worded you should at least check it against similar text in Gatherer. This shouldn't be too much of an issue as most of the score is subjective points, and as [mention]kwanyeegor-ii[/mention] pointed out it wouldn't affect his standing at all, but don't assume when it comes to wording.

[bravelion83]

I've only seen now the last two posts here. I'm going to check that right now.

In the meantime, Round 2 is up.

judges, please check your work in the objective portion (that is, Quality) of the score. If you're not sure about how an effect is or should be worded you should at least check it against similar text in Gatherer. ... but don't assume when it comes to wording.

Ok, this is 100% correct. Present and future judges, let's all always remember this.

not every choice in a card has to be a target. I should not have quality points docked for not using target in the adamant part of my card because otherwise it would not work as intended. If it used target you could not gain control of the tokens the card produces

This is also 100% correct. Using "a" and "target" are functionally different, exactly in the way you pointed out. But I also have to say that, as host, I don't really like the tone behind the following sentence:

I don't want future contestants getting low scores because a judge doesn't know the templating/rules

We judges shouldn't make assumptions, that's true, but neither should the players about the judges. As host, I say: please, let's all keep a calm and civil tone (myself included), without accusing one another or making assumptions about one another. Thank you.

[kwanyeegor-ii]

I'm sorry. I don't want to say blydden is a bad judge or he doesn't know the rules. actually he's really good at judging. however I want judges to settle any rules questions before posting final scores

[bravelion83]

I'm sorry. I don't want to say blydden is a bad judge or he doesn't know the rules. actually he's really good at judging. however I want judges to settle any rules questions before posting final scores

Don't worry, everything's fine. We agree on both of those points, and this is a much better way to put it in my opinion. Anyway, remember that scores are never final as posted, they're only final in the moment of the judging deadline. Everything can always be changed or adjusted before that.

[Blydden]

. . . actually he's really good at judging . . .

Thank you for the compliment and for bringing this issue to my attention!
My judgment of your card has been corrected to the best of my ability.

. . . judges, please check your work in the objective portion (that is, Quality) of the score. If you're not sure about how an effect is or should be worded you should at least check it against similar text in Gatherer . . . don't assume when it comes to wording.

I entirely agree. It is of paramount importance for any MCC judge to put their best effort into every judgment.

I sincerely apologize for my negligence which caused the error. Thank you for your continued trust in my capabilities as a judge. I do not take it for granted, and I promise I shall continue to improve in this regard as well.

[The_Hittite]

I don't know why it makes a Food, as it doesn't seem to tie into the lore

In some versions of the Headless Horseman story (mostly Disney, since that's the one I grew up with) the Horseman has a pumpkin as a replacement head that he leaves behind when he takes his victim's head. It's still a pretty long stretch to call that food, since it's usually depicted as a Jack-o-Lantern, but I liked the idea so I left it in.

[Dragonlover]

(2.5/3) Flavor - Does the name seem realistic for a card? Does the flavor text sound professional? Do all the flavor elements synch together to please Vorthos players?
The name is similar to many Knights in the set, the flavor text sounds great, and I think that the Vorthos elements come mostly together. My one problem is that the FT has nothing to do with the card and it's mechanics, and seems a bit, but that's really not a big issue.

Yeah I couldn't do everything I wanted to with the flavour text on mine cause I suck at flavour text, the idea is that she's the daughter of Syr Ennor, the guy referenced on Stonecoil Serpent. In a hypothetical Eldraine 2 there would probably be other cards that back this up.

Dragonlover

[bravelion83]

I just wanted to warn everybody that starting today in about six hours from this post until tomorrow at an unspecified time (I wish I knew but I don't) I will not have an internet connection available. I think the last thing I will be able to do before that will be posting my card in the DCC. I won't see eventual questions or anything else that gets posted during that time, and I obviously won't be able to answer. If everything goes well, I will be back for sure way before the design deadline. I'm sorry, but it just depends on my internet provider, not on me. Trust me, I would gladly do without this service interruption, but at least they say my internet should be better afterwards. Let's hope so. And anyway, I felt like I had to let you all know beforehand.

EDIT: I'm back now!

Other EDIT to avoid double post (even if multiple days have passed but still...): My own judgments for Round 2 are up.

[slimytrout]

(2/3) Balance - Does the card have a power level appropriate for contemporary constructed/limited environments without breaking them? Does it play well in casual and multiplayer formats? Does it create or fit into a deck/archetype? Does it create an oppressive environment?
I think that this is about on par for a Limited creature, and I think it does a good job of being a big, dumb white creature that has the ability to swing a game in your favor. I think that this might even have a place in a Standard white deck's sideboard as a way to blow out RDW, or a way to stay on par with Congregate creature-spam Commander decks. My only gripe is that the Adventure-half is way overpriced - Angel's Grace does this ability with more protection and Split second at 1 mana, the Adventure could have easily matched it. It's a little weak as-is.

I feel like this is kinda missing the idea of card advantage/flexibility. Like, the reason Angel's Grace gets to be only 1 mana and have split second is because it's extremely narrow - literally doesn't do anything unless you're about to lose the game, and then only saves you for probably one turn. But when you staple on a fairly large body that can also bring your life total way back up, I think play design might even say that forcing players to pay a 2 mana premium is not enough.

Also, I feel like if you say that it's reasonable in limited and possibly has a place in standard and constructed, that answers yes to the first three questions and no to the fourth. It kind of seems like the appeal section is bleeding into the balance section here -- I totally agree that players might be put off by the higher cost compared to familiar cards, but I don't believe that the card is too weak to see play.

(2.5/3) Quality - Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
Your Adventure half of the card is a little too long (five lines when the limit in space is just over 4), but I don't see any other issues. Good job!

Also, the text on Fertile Footsteps is almost exactly as long as the text on Timely Return -- it only shows up as longer because of the specific length of words on a standard-width, normal text magic card, which doesn't apply to adventures. Plus, there's a bit of extra space in that card's text box. Obviously hard to know *exactly* what would fit on a card because none of the editors (that I know of) can represent adventures yet, but it seems to me like Timely Return would fit.

Here they are next to each other in MS word (admittedly not a perfect analogue, but should be close), and you can see that my text is about three characters ("ad.") longer than what WotC printed - unlikely to lead to overflow given the extra room on the printed card.

picture

Show

Hide