The MCC Discussion Thread

[Ink-Treader]

My May MCC Round 2 judgments are complete.

[bravelion83]

My May MCC Round 2 judgments are complete.

I can't certainly complain with first place in the bracket (by the way making macabre mana two cards rather than one, and also specifically colored, was exactly due to the lessons we've all learned with delve, I was trying to make a fixed version of it). I'll just point out that the top 3 (not 2) are supposed to advance, and that should include shullz, whose username should also be bolded in your scores spoiler.

Top 3 from each bracket advance.

[slimytrout]

My judgements are in, I apologize for the delay. I will post the next round in six hours or so, so if you have complaints/questions get them in quickly.

[void_nothing]

@slimytrout I'm compelled to point out that I think you misread my new symbol's reminder text, which I think is my fault for the formatting I used - exiling the permanent doesn't give a one-mana discount but effectively three because it causes you to add U. My intention was for the ability to be payable essentially with 2UU, 1 and exiling a blue permanent, or exiling two blue permanents and adding UU, allowing for you to then spend that mana if you have a sink for it, which the card intentionally gives.

[slimytrout]

Ah, I see -- yes, that is a misunderstanding on my part. I believe that will increase your score slightly, although there might be a slight counterbalancing deduction in elegance given the aforementioned misunderstanding. I will edit my judgement, but given my time constraints while traveling and the fact that such edits are not going to change who is moving on, my plan is to do it after I post the next round but before the deadline to submit so that everyone has plenty of time to know who they are going to be up against in the bracket round.

[void_nothing]

I have no reason to object to that. Thank you. Hope the rest of your trip goes well.

[shullz]

@slimytrout I have a question about round 3.

You may provide some visual description of your card's layout,.

Would a visual mockup, like we did with the watermarks in round 1, be allowed here, too?

[Komandon]

Would lesions, the flips cards (original Kamigawa) level up cards, the old thresholds (grave symbol), prototypes, mutate, Host and augment from Un sets and Spree with that thing in the right corner all count if they didn't already exist for card frames. Just trying to gauge if I used a new mechanic or tweak an old one (like spree being modes) to make a new look justified.

Also if it's say it's a combo card that isn't a split like DFC or Split I'm assuming I'm allow to have both cards as the entry just the word count subchallenge is in tack.

[slimytrout]

@slimytrout I have a question about round 3.

You may provide some visual description of your card's layout,.

Would a visual mockup, like we did with the watermarks in round 1, be allowed here, too?

Yes, you can always make a visual mockup of your card -- that is allowed under the MCC rules even without a dispensation from the host.

Would lesions, the flips cards (original Kamigawa) level up cards, the old thresholds (grave symbol), prototypes, mutate, Host and augment from Un sets and Spree with that thing in the right corner all count if they didn't already exist for card frames. Just trying to gauge if I used a new mechanic or tweak an old one (like spree being modes) to make a new look justified.

Also if it's say it's a combo card that isn't a split like DFC or Split I'm assuming I'm allow to have both cards as the entry just the word count subchallenge is in tack.

Lessons and spree are in the same category as Vehicles -- I would not disqualify them but I don't think I would give full credit either, since while the new frame (such as it is) has some relevance for the card's functionality, it is quite modest compared to something like Miracles where it is actually playing an important role. Flip cards, level-up, prototypes, mutate, host, and augment would definitely all count. I guess I'd say that the threshold one would be disqualified -- R&D has decided that it's not necessary, so clearly it's not at all important to the card's functioning and is purely cosmetic.

In general, if folks have an idea and want to run it by me, I would be happy to comment on whether it would receive full/partial/no credit.

[bravelion83]

@slimytrout I have a question about round 3.

You may provide some visual description of your card's layout,.

Would a visual mockup, like we did with the watermarks in round 1, be allowed here, too?

Yes, you can always make a visual mockup of your card -- that is allowed under the MCC rules even without a dispensation from the host.

The guidelines agree. Render is optional but always allowed. In fact that's exactly what I am going to do for my submission, it would be too hard to explain with words what I'm doing without referring to existing mechanics. I am working right in this moment on a custom MSE layout for this specific use. It will also probably come in handy when I get to the set/plane in my table that my submission is supposed to come from, essentially I'm designing something now that I had already planned to design in the future and taking advantage of that for this round. I've never even mentioned that plane before, not even in the DCC. In fact, it just happened by chance that I decided its final name only yesterday, even though I've had the idea for the plane since a long time ago.

[Komandon]

@slimytrout I have a question about round 3.

You may provide some visual description of your card's layout,.

Would a visual mockup, like we did with the watermarks in round 1, be allowed here, too?

Yes, you can always make a visual mockup of your card -- that is allowed under the MCC rules even without a dispensation from the host.

Would lesions, the flips cards (original Kamigawa) level up cards, the old thresholds (grave symbol), prototypes, mutate, Host and augment from Un sets and Spree with that thing in the right corner all count if they didn't already exist for card frames. Just trying to gauge if I used a new mechanic or tweak an old one (like spree being modes) to make a new look justified.

Also if it's say it's a combo card that isn't a split like DFC or Split I'm assuming I'm allow to have both cards as the entry just the word count subchallenge is in tack.

Lessons and spree are in the same category as Vehicles -- I would not disqualify them but I don't think I would give full credit either, since while the new frame (such as it is) has some relevance for the card's functionality, it is quite modest compared to something like Miracles where it is actually playing an important role. Flip cards, level-up, prototypes, mutate, host, and augment would definitely all count. I guess I'd say that the threshold one would be disqualified -- R&D has decided that it's not necessary, so clearly it's not at all important to the card's functioning and is purely cosmetic.

In general, if folks have an idea and want to run it by me, I would be happy to comment on whether it would receive full/partial/no credit.

Would a new DFC/ transformation symbol count if the function is new.
I have an idea similar to a non-DFC mechanic but the frame is thinking is lazy but also not enough room for text unless as a DFC.

[slimytrout]

Would a new DFC/ transformation symbol count if the function is new.
I have an idea similar to a non-DFC mechanic but the frame is thinking is lazy but also not enough room for text unless as a DFC.

Just putting a new symbol in an existing frame doesn't qualify -- for instance, the Eldrazi Werewolves from Eldritch Moon would not count. If there's some new aspect to the frame but it's fundamentally just combining two existing things -- for instance the NEO transforming sagas -- then I would probably award that partial credit. If there's something genuinely new but it happens to be a TDFC -- for instance Sieges -- then that definitely gets full credit.

[Komandon]

Would a new DFC/ transformation symbol count if the function is new.
I have an idea similar to a non-DFC mechanic but the frame is thinking is lazy but also not enough room for text unless as a DFC.

Just putting a new symbol in an existing frame doesn't qualify -- for instance, the Eldrazi Werewolves from Eldritch Moon would not count. If there's some new aspect to the frame but it's fundamentally just combining two existing things -- for instance the NEO transforming sagas -- then I would probably award that partial credit. If there's something genuinely new but it happens to be a TDFC -- for instance Sieges -- then that definitely gets full credit.

I'm sorry I'm really confused why Miracle would count fully. A simpler idea I have could do something like that frame wise but a DFC area symbol without being a DFC would look better but I know the tombstone on older cards for things like threshold doesn't count.

All my ideas function different but look like some other cards in a way such as DFC, Flip/new split, miracle, and adventure. Just not different enough except one which would be too odd.

[slimytrout]

I'm sorry I'm really confused why Miracle would count fully. A simpler idea I have could do something like that frame wise but a DFC area symbol without being a DFC would look better but I know the tombstone on older cards for things like threshold doesn't count.

Miracles have a different frame -- that is, the radiating lines around the top -- because they require it to function properly. If they didn't have the new frame, people would just put them into their hand as they drew them and then it would be impossible to tell whether they were drawn that turn (which was a problem for tournament play anyway, but that's not really the point). What I'm trying to get at is that your frame has to actually have some mechanical relevance to the card's function to get full points, it can't just be a cosmetic change like when they first made enchantment creatures. It's hard for me to give you any advice about all those other ideas without specifics, but I do believe that there are many possible ways to approach this challenge in a way that has a clear distinction from existing frames -- just in standard right now there's prototype, sieges, cases that all would have earned full points (and maybe others that I'm forgetting about).

[Komandon]

I see. Oh. I have a simple idea but it's getting hard to made a render that makes sense. I'll try for now the actual card and the describe the frame until l can make something like it.

[void_nothing]

While bravelion is confirmed as our host for June, if you are interest in hosting the MCC in July, please let me know and we can get this slot filled early. Thank you!

[Ink-Treader]

My May MCC Round 3 judgments are complete.

[slimytrout]

Mine are as well. Since we're cutting it a bit fine on the deadline and this was a tricky round, I'll hold off on posting the next round until midday tomorrow in case folks have comments/questions, then it's on to the finals!

[bravelion83]

The judge signup thread for June is up. Round 1 will go up later tonight.

EDIT: Round 1 is now up.

[Raptorchan]

@bravelion83: you said that outlaw for the round is "mysterious", but can it be a known legendary creature from another plane since most OTJ outlaws are legends we know?

[Lorn Asbord Schutta]

@bravelion83, just to make sure, we can already shorten to simply "enters", instead of "enters the battlefield"?

[bravelion83]

@bravelion83: you said that outlaw for the round is "mysterious", but can it be a known legendary creature from another plane since most OTJ outlaws are legends we know?

Yes, in fact that was exactly the intent, that they come from a known plane other than Thunder Junction itself. You can make up a new plane specifically for this purpose or use one of your own that you already have (for example I could use one of my characters from Vukanat and say they ended up on Thunder Junction), but using an already known plane is probably the best way, and the easiest for sure, to meet the Main Challenge. The word "mysterious" refers to the things we know about them on Thunder Junction, the less we know about why they came to Thunder Junction and what they are doing or looking for here the better it is (and you can probably easily guess why...). That's what should be unknown, or anyway not clear just from your card. As I said in the intro, there will be time for that later...

@bravelion83, just to make sure, we can already shorten to simply "enters", instead of "enters the battlefield"?

Both are allowed until Bloomburrow's prerelease according to the guidelines, so yes, you can already use the shorter templating, but you won't be punished for still using the longer current one. It's only after Bloomburrow's prerelease weekend is over (aka after Sunday, July 28) that you will be expected to use the new template and you will be penalized for using the old one. Until then, both can be used in the MCC.

Guidelines document, section 6.2, page 15, under "Quality", added part in italics for clarity

Show

Hide

If changes to templating are shown during the previews of a real set, and unless otherwise specified by the host, you can use both templating styles, old and new, until that set's Prerelease, that is until we can play with the real physical cards. Starting with that set's Prerelease, only the new templating will be accepted, and if you still use the old one after that, you will suffer point deductions here (that is, in the Quality section of the rubric).

Adding this to the clarifications in the round thread right now.

[kwanyeegor-ii]

That Man in Black Suit CC
Legendary Creature - Alien (Mythic)
Changeling
T: Put an implant counter on target creature. (Implanted creatures are 3/4 green Aliens as long as you control a Mothership Vehicle.)
2UU, T: Gain control of target implanted Alien.
4GG, T: Create Eclipse of Thousand Suns, legendary colorless 9/12 artifact Mothership Vehicle with flying, trample, ward 6 and crew 6.
3/4

@netn10 it says in clarifications that the outlaw type has to be in the typeline... but looks easys to fix for you

[bravelion83]

That Man in Black Suit CC
Legendary Creature - Alien (Mythic)
Changeling
T: Put an implant counter on target creature. (Implanted creatures are 3/4 green Aliens as long as you control a Mothership Vehicle.)
2UU, T: Gain control of target implanted Alien.
4GG, T: Create Eclipse of Thousand Suns, legendary colorless 9/12 artifact Mothership Vehicle with flying, trample, ward 6 and crew 6.
3/4

@netn10 it says in clarifications that the outlaw type has to be in the typeline... but looks easys to fix for you

Indeed. This is not an outlaw and as is doesn't meet the Main Challenge, and it would be a DQ unfortunately. @netn10, you still have one day left to adjust this, and I would heartly invite you to do so within the design deadline.

[Ink-Treader]

My May MCC Final Round judgments are complete! With over a day to spare, there's plenty of time to comment or ask questions.