MTGNexus

Sorry for my delaying in posting March's round 1 judgments. They'll be done by tomorrow.

Round 2 is up! http://nxs.wf/np129797

@RaikouRider I mean, as far as I know it works within the rules, but it's definitely not the mechanic Cipher, which specifically works while a spell is on the stack. Obviously the mechanic could undergo a major rewrite to work the way your card does, but that's really the same thing as having the mechanic. I considered a similar approach last round when I came up with the following card:

Plaguespore Beast 3BG
Creature - Fungus Beast (R)
Graft -3 (This creature enters the battlefield with three -1/-1 counters on it. Whenever another creature enters the battlefield, you may move a -1/-1 counter from this creature onto it.)
Each creature you control with a -1/-1 counter on it has deathtouch.
5/5

I thought it was a fun concept, but I realized that Graft was not actually written to work this way and so I figured I might risk disqualification by submitting it.

RaikouRider wrote: ↑

3 years ago

I know cipher currently exists on only noncreature spells, but I believe with the new copying rules, this is supported? Ping me in MCC Discussion if it isn't.

Psychic Revenant 2UB
Creature - Spirit Horror {R}
Flying
Whenever Psychic Revenant enters the battlefield or attacks, each opponent mills cards until they mill a land card.
Cipher (When this creature dies, exile it encoded on a creature you control. Whenever that creature deals combat damage to a player, its controller may cast a copy of the encoded card without paying its mana cost. A copy of a permanent spell becomes a token.)
3/3

So slimy has a point that this is not cipher as we know it, but there's also easy precedent in another guild mechanic, haunt, which appeared on both creatures and instorceries. Haunt exiled on resolution with the nonpermanents and on dying with the creatures, which by analogy seems like how this WOULD work.

Ultimately it's @Venedrex's call over whether the card fits the challenge.

*NFL Ref Voice* Upon reviewing of the play, the ruling on the field stands. In all seriousness, based on looking at haunt on instants and sorceries, I'm good with allowing this to be treated as a variant of Cipher and qualify for the purposes of this round. The fact that Maro described the original Cipher as having very little design space also leads me to allow this, as I could see Wizards themselves expanding Cipher a little if they revisited it in a set such as Modern Horizons.

As a judge, I accept the host's word, but I would certainly deduct points in the Main Challenge section for a card that doesn't have the exact ability from RTR block, but a tweaked version of it.

bravelion83 wrote: ↑

3 years ago

As a judge, I accept the host's word, but I would certainly deduct points in the Main Challenge section for a card that doesn't have the exact ability from RTR block, but a tweaked version of it.

Well people frequently ask why the "Main Challenge" section has two points associated with it, and this is why: Rarely, an entry will fulfill the letter of the challenge but not the spirit, or, in this case, fulfill both the letter and spirit of the challenge but in an entirely unintended way.

My judgments for round 2 are already up. Yes, in just two hours. It probably shows that I'm an unemployed person that's still in recovery, so between that and the pandemic I'm kinda forced to stay home and pass the time somehow. Well, both Magic in general and this site are reasons for me to go on. I know this is a big thing to say, but it's the truth. Now I can go to bed, it's 10 pm here in Italy and now that I have to take my medications in the morning, I'm forced to sleep in the night. I still haven't got used to it. See you all tomorrow.

Round 3 is up! http://nxs.wf/np133627

I want to say that I have forgot to change the reminder text for detain in my second round submission. It would not matter anyway, provided that I cannot lose more then three points from quality, but just to be clean I rather mention it.

The judge signup thread for April is up and has been up since yesterday. Round 1 will be up on the 1st.

EDIT: Round 1 is up too.

I like your design for bold ghastspeaker @kaburi inktreader!

May I ask for a two days extension for March MCC?

Lorn Asbord Schutta wrote: ↑

3 years ago

May I ask for a two days extension for March MCC?

Sure!

A quick question: we are supposed to use templating before or from STX? It is fully spoiled, but not yet released.

Lorn Asbord Schutta wrote: ↑

3 years ago

A quick question: we are supposed to use templating before or from STX? It is fully spoiled, but not yet released.

Yes, since we've seen it, and since it will be the standard going forward.

Lorn Asbord Schutta wrote: ↑

3 years ago

A quick question: we are supposed to use templating before or from STX? It is fully spoiled, but not yet released.

From the FAQ (link in my signature, emphasis mine):

Which wording are we using?
Always the most up‐to‐date as possible. If a previewed card reveals a new wording, between that preview and its set's Prerelease you can use either the old or the new wording. After the Prerelease, that is after we all have had a chance to play with the real physical card, only the new wording will be accepted, and if you still use the old one, your card will be penalized in Quality.

No one should be penalized for using or not using the new wording until Strixhaven's prerelease (April 16-18). Starting that weekend, you are expected to use the new wording.

I had a couple of minor comments:

bravelion83 wrote: ↑

3 years ago

I read this as "another object that's given counters". If this object isn't on the battlefield yet, its abilities can't trigger. I don't know how intuitive it is, but this is the way I think it is.

I don't know if this helps me or hurts me, but I'm pretty sure the opposite is true. Here's a ruling, taken from Sharktocrab:

"An ability that triggers when counters are put on a permanent will trigger if that permanent somehow enters the battlefield with those counters."

That seems pretty clear to me that this will trigger its own ability.

bravelion83 wrote: ↑

3 years ago

Deducting half a point for Subchallenge 1, as this has the three colored pips of a guild (Selesnya), but that guild is not the one the mechanic is from (Boros). Typical case of letter of the challenge met, but not the spirit.

I don't really think this is fair. The subchallenge reads: "Your card has at least three colored pips in its casting cost, including both colors of a single guild." I added that emphasis because it seems to me pretty clear that if the subchallenge was meant to specify the specific guild that you used the mechanic from, it wouldn't have been worded this way (although @Venedrex can correct me if I'm wrong).

slimytrout wrote: ↑

3 years ago

I had a couple of minor comments:

bravelion83 wrote: ↑

3 years ago

I read this as "another object that's given counters". If this object isn't on the battlefield yet, its abilities can't trigger. I don't know how intuitive it is, but this is the way I think it is.

I don't know if this helps me or hurts me, but I'm pretty sure the opposite is true. Here's a ruling, taken from Sharktocrab:

"An ability that triggers when counters are put on a permanent will trigger if that permanent somehow enters the battlefield with those counters."

That seems pretty clear to me that this will trigger its own ability.

Ok, you found what I wasn't able to find, an official ruling. Good. It does trigger its own ability. That changes quite a lot in the judgment, I judged multiple areas thinking that this was not the case. Now I don't have the time to edit the judgment, I will do it later tonight. Thank you.

bravelion83 wrote: ↑

3 years ago

Deducting half a point for Subchallenge 1, as this has the three colored pips of a guild (Selesnya), but that guild is not the one the mechanic is from (Boros). Typical case of letter of the challenge met, but not the spirit.

I don't really think this is fair. The subchallenge reads: "Your card has at least three colored pips in its casting cost, including both colors of a single guild." I added that emphasis because it seems to me pretty clear that if the subchallenge was meant to specify the specific guild that you used the mechanic from, it wouldn't have been worded this way (although @Venedrex can correct me if I'm wrong).

Yes, I would like to hear @Venedrex's opinion too. I understand your reasoning but I'm still convinced of what I wrote. We just need to hear the host's opinion here.

Sorry guys for showing up late, this has been a hectic week. As far as the subchallenge goes, here's how I see it. This is the Ravnica MCC. The name of the round was: "Strength of the Guilds." The subchallenges were to funnel you into making a card that represents the guilds to the t. The example card given was March of the Multitudes. So yes, technically you didn't have to put convoke on your green white creature.

Yet, the above guidelines and clarifications were there for a reason. I didn't specifically say you needed have the guild mechanic of your card's color on it, but I think the implication can be drawn from everything I just mentioned above. So it's not the end of the world, but I daresay bravelion is correct that the spirit of the challenge is clearly apparent, and he is well within his rights to dock you a point or three for not making a card with the guild mechanic of its colors.

I've edited my judgment based on the Sharktocrab ruling. The second point stands:

Venedrex wrote: ↑

3 years ago

I daresay bravelion is correct that the spirit of the challenge is clearly apparent, and he is well within his rights to dock you a point or three for not making a card with the guild mechanic of its colors.

In other (very relevant) news: Venedrex is now the third judge for April and brackets for April Round 1 have changed. I've assigned to Venedrex two players that were previously in my bracket and two that were in void_nothing's one. Now we have a bracket of four and two brackets of five. The last player in each bracket will be eliminated and all other players will advance.

As much as I'd love to take part in the finals, which seems like a very fun and innovative challenge, I feel obligated to point out that, unless I'm missing something, I lost my bracket to RaikouRider by half a point, so I should have been eliminated.

slimytrout wrote: ↑

3 years ago

As much as I'd love to take part in the finals, which seems like a very fun and innovative challenge, I feel obligated to point out that, unless I'm missing something, I lost my bracket to RaikouRider by half a point, so I should have been eliminated.

My sincere apologies, thank you for letting me know. I will amend the thread right away. Thank you for taking part in the contest, and I apologize again for my mistake.

April Round 2 is up.

Clarification question: If we're using Egg in the name, can it be part of a hyphenated word? I.e., "Golden-egg" or "Egg-guardian"?