The MCC Discussion Thread

[Ink-Treader]

My October Final round judgments are in!

[bravelion83]

I wanted to make a note about the judgment of my card. This is not meant to ask for a change in scores or anything like that, just an explanation of some behind the scenes stuff. I fully accept Ink-Treader's judgment and I thank them for it.

Departed Captain 2CU
Creature — Merfolk Soldier Spirit (R)
Battle cry, haunt
When Departed Captain or the creature it haunts dies, choose up to one target player. If the number of cards in their graveyard is less than the number of cards in their library, they mill twenty cards.
The continent of Meibeuld was once a lush land with advanced civilizations. The Witch's spell of power devastated it. Most were killed, their spirits condemned to haunt the wastelands forever. Few survived, turned into vampires and forced to emigrate.
3/2

(2/3) Flavor - Name is generic, but the flavor text is appreciated.

Polish
(3/3) Quality - Looks good. That is a large amount of flavor text though; could have gone without mentioning vampires without hurting flavor any.

Flavor explanation of the card

Show

Hide

I guess this is a danger of playing in contests with cards that are supposed to come from my huge table that I often talk about. This card is supposed to come from a plane called Taqul, and that flavor text is exactly the explanation of how vampirism was introduced on that plane, which is THE main plot point of that set's story. It's the return to Taqul, we've already been there once and saw the plane as it is today, with the vampire nation (named Meibeuld) essentially reigning over all the other ones, even though just not officially. At the end, the vampire kingdom is defeated and dissolved, with a new republic founded in its place, and that's the end of the first set on Taqul. On that first visit we also hear whispers about some mythical "Wastelands" (upper case) existing in the far north of the plane, but no explorer who tried to go there has ever came back, so the citizens of the two known continents aren't even sure those Wastelands exist. That's all we get to know in the first set. The return set is a flashback whose purpose is exactly to tell the reader about how the situation got to the point we saw in our first visit there. The point is the Wastelands of today actually exist, and that once Meibeuld was not the vampire kingdom of today, but a whole other third continent full of life, with different races, civilizations, cultures, etc... which we get to see in the flashback set. A planeswalker witch, which we have already seen in the story arc before, is discovered in this set to actually be centuries old. She went to Taqul a few centuries ago and, to gain power and long life for herself, she cast a spell drawing all mana from the whole continent. She got the power and long life she was looking for, but to cast her spell she had to drain all the mana of the former continent of Meibeuld, turning it into the forgotten Wastelands of today. Then she planeswalked away to pursue her own plans, but her spell depriving the continent of all its mana had the consequence of also depriving it of all its life. All living beings on the continent have been killed as a side effect of her big spell. Nodoby survived on the continent, with most turning into spirits, still haunting the Wastelands of today (this card is one of those spirits, once a Merfolk sea captain before the Witch's spell), and the rest (the minority actually) turning into undead vampires, finding thenselves on a wasted continent with no food, either of the traditional kind or of the blood variety, as no living beings are left on it. So those newly formed vampires were faced with a choice: staying there and eventually die again, this time from starvation, or emigrate on the other two continents of the plane (the two ones we saw on our first visit there, there are no other ones). To avoid starvation, they were essentially forced to choose the latter way. So they emigrated south abandoning their now wasted continent, and as they disembarked on the land of the other two continents, they proceeded to steal the land of the natives to found their own kingdom, which they named Meibeuld in memory of the continent where they once lived. In the time between then and today, they and their descendants also rewrote history to erase the true origins of their new kindgom, but rumors and voices are hard to shut down, so those survived and myths and legends talking about "the Wastelands" were born. So, essentially, the return set is a flashback explaining the true origins of the vampire kingdom that oppressed all other nations and that was defeated in the first set. It's the whole point of the flashback return set to explain that, so I can't just take away that sentence from the flavor text and call it a day. I wanted to explain this story and I had only a few lines of flavor text to use. If I cut that sentence, I cut the whole main story plot of the set this card is from, in fact I've just added it to that set file, which was empty so far. I had already planned since a long time ago for colorless mana to return by itself in the first set (which I have already completed) to represent the rumored Wastelands, and to pair colorless mana with colored mana for the inhabitants of the former continent of Meibeuld in the flashback set (which I still have to make). So as I read the challenges, this custom plane of mine immediately came to my mind and I wanted to make a card from there, but I had to explain all the story in a few lines of flavor text. I honestly feel like no part of the flavor text could be cut without losing a part of the intended story. Thanks for the judgment.

I probably should have made some other card not set on one of my own worlds...

[bravelion83]

The judge signup thread for December is up. Round 1 will be posted on December 1st. I hope you all are ready to venture underground!

[Komandon]

I can't remember fully the rules of this thread. I know I can ask questions before the judging. Don't know if I can after. I'm actually confused not just on my card but other and even some by the other judge that did the other four. Even if an off change I was right I still would advance.

I don't wish to mention by name to compare my judgments with others. Actual would be rather difficult for me to ask clarification for mine in some of the areas without it causing a dialog instead of a simple questions then answers. So if I'm allow I think I would need to be more general.

[void_nothing]

You're absolutely allowed to ask for clarification after judgment is finished, but it's important to the integrity of the contest that judgments are final. Please don't expect anything other than an honest discussion. I would say the only real way you could get a score changed would be by demonstrating that a judge got something factually wrong (i.e. you were marked down on Quality for using wording that you can show is on a real card's Oracle text).

[Ink-Treader]

Congratulations to @Subject16, our 2023 October MCC champion!

Was my first ever time hosting, and I hope the challenges were interesting and enjoyable. Should I do this again, I'll probably pick a theme with a less experimental final, in terms of design, but it was fun to see what people came up with.

[void_nothing]

What a close final - congrats to Subject16!

[bravelion83]

I can't remember fully the rules of this thread. I know I can ask questions before the judging. Don't know if I can after. I'm actually confused not just on my card but other and even some by the other judge that did the other four. Even if an off change I was right I still would advance.

I don't wish to mention by name to compare my judgments with others. Actual would be rather difficult for me to ask clarification for mine in some of the areas without it causing a dialog instead of a simple questions then answers. So if I'm allow I think I would need to be more general.

You're absolutely allowed to ask for clarification after judgment is finished, but it's important to the integrity of the contest that judgments are final. Please don't expect anything other than an honest discussion. I would say the only real way you could get a score changed would be by demonstrating that a judge got something factually wrong (i.e. you were marked down on Quality for using wording that you can show is on a real card's Oracle text).

In addition to what void_nothing said in his reply, I will quote from the guidelines document (link in my signature).

From section 5.3.2 - Duties of a player:

Accepting the judges' scores and judgments. Under ordinary circumstances, a player can't appeal the scores and/or the judgment of their card. If a player thinks that there are problems with the scores and/or judgment of their card, they are allowed to contact the judge either via pm or in the discussion thread (NEVER in the round thread!) to ask for further explanations and/or explain their own reasons. The judge can choose to adjust their scores and/or judgment if they want, but they're not required to. If they choose to do so, they must do it within the judging deadline. The judge has the final say on whether to do that or not. Both the player and the judge are expected to keep a polite and civil tone throughout their discussion. Remember that all scores and judgments are automatically final in the moment of the judging deadline, even if the host hasn't posted the next round yet.

Then from the FAQ, page 20 (the penultimate one of the document):

I feel that the score my card received was completely unfair! What should I do to challenge it?
First, in this contest "completely unfair" and "challenge" are just bad words. Judgments are final as of the judging deadline. Sometimes they won't be perfect, but that's ok. We are humans, perfection doesn't belong to either ourselves or the world we live in. What you can do is sending a pm to the judge explaining your reasons in a polite and civil way, but don't expect anything to change. The judges aren't required to adjust or change their judgments based on your pm, but they can if they want and if the judging deadline hasn't passed yet.

Okay, maybe my card wasn't the best, but my opponent's card was horrific and it beat mine! Can I challenge the score of my opponent's card?
No. Again, you can send a polite and civil pm to the judge, but don't expect anything to change. In this case specifically, please contact the judge via pm and NOT in the discussion thread. Discussing an opponent's card is, on the surface, just as valid as discussing your own, but the potential bad feelings just aren't worth it.

Hope this helps.

[haywire]

@void_nothing just wanted to discuss the flavor of my card. I was trying to (in one card) nod to the idea of another multiversal-level threat, similar to the recent arc, but I figured that in order to be effective from a plot standpoint, it would a) have to not occur for a while, focus on smaller stories for a long while first, and b) have to establish itself as more threatening than the phyrexian war. The Theros gods were one of the only things in the story that could resist phyresis at all, leading to the events described on Heliod, the Radiant Dawn // Heliod, the Warped Eclipse where they instead corrupt the followers to change the god. I realized that something becoming "Blind-Eternity-fied" is retreading very similar ground to something becoming Phyrexian, so I wanted to sort of establish its power tiering by saying "oh, that one thing that phyresis couldn't do directly? This can do that" to distinguish the two things somewhat.

I definitely felt the flavor text was a little clunky, but trying to wrap that whole idea in something that was already very constrained on character count was tough. I completely agree with the deduction, just wanted to try to expand on my goal with the snippet.

[Raptorchan]

November Round 3 is up.

[slimytrout]

I don't know if it really matters, but just a heads up that the pairings are not typically assigned until after the cards are submitted. Per the guidelines: "As the design deadline comes, the host divides the players into 1‐vs‐1 pairs." Again, it's not a major issue, but thought I'd let you know.

[Raptorchan]

I don't know if it really matters, but just a heads up that the pairings are not typically assigned until after the cards are submitted. Per the guidelines: "As the design deadline comes, the host divides the players into 1‐vs‐1 pairs." Again, it's not a major issue, but thought I'd let you know.

Totally forgot about it. But what's done is done, so I am hiding them until the moment comes.

[void_nothing]

Honestly it's down to convention. I've never made the pairings at the start of the round, but ultimately it's not likely to have any influence on the outcome, so I think it's fine either way if that's how the host does it.

Probably a good call to redo it this time, however.

[bravelion83]

Honestly it's down to convention. I've never made the pairings at the start of the round, but ultimately it's not likely to have any influence on the outcome, so I think it's fine either way if that's how the host does it.

Probably a good call to redo it this time, however.

Neither have I. In fact, I was surprised to see them, but I said nothing exactly for the reason void_nothing pointed out. I also agree that it would probably be a good idea to reroll the dice (as I wrote, I also often use dice) once the design deadline comes. The guidelines do indeed say that the pairings should be done "as the design deadline comes" (see section 3.2.3).

[Komandon]

@bravelion83 I appreciate you listing the rules text.
@void_nothing originally I was going to be general questions. Including ones I had rulings before you posted that confused me but it didn't seem appropriate.
I know even if points added from an appeal I still wouldn't qualify so this is more of for future reference.

One part is langur of what I was trying to convey. You said "…instead that creature phases out. You may have each player draw a card." When my text was " you may have all players draw a card and that permanent phases out instead.". This isn't a rule of the contest question but the game. I wanted to make all players drawing a card act as kinda a cost of you getting to phase it out. Would the two different sentence in your suggestion still do that?

I understand the Whitemane Lion reference and comparison. So this part isn't a critic just an explanation. I'm a combo player and make this more of a tool box card. (Not sure if that's an old reference or not.) not just to protect your creature but deal with a threat.

[void_nothing]

Okay, in that case you'd probably need to say "if you do" - there's nothing in that wording linking the phasing out to the caster's choice of having players draw. Was your intention for the token to be created if the target phased out? If not, I honestly think you'd benefit from some novel wording using modal:

Spell mastery - Choose one -
• Return target nontoken creature or planeswalker to its owner's hand. Its controller creates a 2/2 blue Elemental Bird creature token with flying.
• Target nontoken creature or planeswalker phases out. Each player draws a card. Choose this only if there are two or more instant and/or sorcery cards in your graveyard.

[Komandon]

Okay, in that case you'd probably need to say "if you do" - there's nothing in that wording linking the phasing out to the caster's choice of having players draw. Was your intention for the token to be created if the target phased out? If not, I honestly think you'd benefit from some novel wording using modal:

Spell mastery - Choose one -
• Return target nontoken creature or planeswalker to its owner's hand. Its controller creates a 2/2 blue Elemental Bird creature token with flying.
• Target nontoken creature or planeswalker phases out. Each player draws a card. Choose this only if there are two or more instant and/or sorcery cards in your graveyard.

No the token creation would still have happened. Just it phases out instead and players draw a card. Originally I was going to have it all other draw players draw a card but you get to add either a loyalty or +1/+1 counter on it first prior at the cost of loss of card advantage. Didn't know how to word that and but due to the original entry for round 1, has a trigger for second card being drawn and I thought it had to have synergy with that card.

[bravelion83]

Round 1 for December is up.

[Raptorchan]

Less than 24 hours to finish your designs for November MCC Round 3, guys.

[AnotherAlias]

As far as I can tell, Estrid's mentor is never stated. Do I just make something up?

[void_nothing]

As far as I can tell, Estrid's mentor is never stated. Do I just make something up?

Not the host, but as a judge, yes. Remember that the Origins legend cycle introduced new characters.

[Komandon]

Two questions. First does the main challenge meaning for example "the ability word "Descend 4" with the corresponding text in that ability, and/or"
mean it can have rule text of the mechanic without the name. For example the mechanic Landfall and how cards that don't have the keyword such as Maja, Bretagard Protector , Druid Class [/card] or Roaring Earth . So I just have a card that says for example "As long as there are four or more permanent cards in your graveyard **some ability**"
The reason I ask is if I wanted to include mechanics that is not in The Lost Cavern of Ixalan to make it worded more as if it existed in other planes.



Second question (sorry for length)
Am I allow a small disclaimer. The actual one I was thinking (but might not make a card. Just still thinking.). Saying ***part of an nonexistent cycle***
That verbatim. The two questions are unrelated I'm still thinking of an entry just narrowing down what I want to make.

[bravelion83]

Two questions. First does the main challenge meaning for example "the ability word "Descend 4" with the corresponding text in that ability, and/or"
mean it can have rule text of the mechanic without the name. For example the mechanic Landfall and how cards that don't have the keyword such as Maja, Bretagard Protector , Druid Class [/card] or Roaring Earth .

No, it has to be keyworded (technically ability-worded, but I'm saying it that way for clarity). The actual words "Descend 4 —" MUST be there, and in that ability the text that corresponds to the ability word descend 4 ("[if/as long as] there are four or more permanent cards in your graveyard") must appear unaltered, as is. You can put whatever you want before or after that text, but that exact line of text AND the ability word "Descend 4 —" MUST be there for the Main Challenge to be met at all.

The same goes with "Descent 8 —" and "[if/as long as] there are eight or more permanent cards in your graveyard", "Fathomless descent —" and "[where X is/equal to] the number of permanent cards in your graveyard", and the string "descended this turn" (which also must be unaltered).

So I just have a card that says for example "As long as there are four or more permanent cards in your graveyard **some ability**"
The reason I ask is if I wanted to include mechanics that is not in The Lost Cavern of Ixalan to make it worded more as if it existed in other planes.

Your proposed wording is exactly what descend 4 is, so just put a "Descend 4 —" right before it and you're good to go. For example, the following would pass the Main Challenge:

Descend 4 — As long as there are four or more permanent cards in your graveyard, **some ability**

Second question (sorry for length)

No need to apologize. I am a high school professional teacher in real life. I always tell my students never to be afraid to ask, making questions is not an annoyance or a sign or weakness, it just means you haven't properly understood something, and it's my job as your teacher to make you understand it. If anything, it's my fault if you don't understand, not yours. Well, what I say to my students in the classroom is also perfectly true for me when I host an MCC month. I make the challenges, and if a player doesn't understand them, fully or in part, it's my job to explain them better to make them understand. So no guilt on your part and no need to apologize. Whatever you don't understand fully, ask. Remember: do not ever be afraid to ask. Ever.

Am I allow a small disclaimer. The actual one I was thinking (but might not make a card. Just still thinking.). Saying ***part of an nonexistent cycle***
That verbatim. The two questions are unrelated I'm still thinking of an entry just narrowing down what I want to make.

No, sorry, that's not allowed. No matter how small it is, it still qualifies as extra content in the submission post, and that's a cause of DQ. The card must speak for itself without any additional notes (unless requested by the round challenges, but that's not the case here).

Adding this to the clarifications spoiler. Thank you for asking. Don't be afraid to ask again should you have any more doubts or need more explanation.

[shullz]

(2,5/3) Quality - I am not English native so more fluent speakers can correct me, but. Shouldn't the flavor text say "You're not alone, my doves"?

I'm not a native speaker either. As a German, I usually tend to use too many commas in English, if I go by what feels right to me.
Because of this, I copied the flavor text directly from the source:
MARCH OF THE MACHINE | RAVNICA: ONE AND THE SAME

[...]
The only other gorgon calls to the rest of us from across the prison cell.

"You're not alone my doves, I'm here, I'm here."

I yell for her, and my yell is halted by a sob.

I hear two wet punctures, a scream, then a sound that reminds me of meat hitting the wet ground. The other Golgari prisoners call out for her. "Ludmilla!! No!"
[...]

So if it's grammatically incorrect, I'm laying the blame on WotC for not proofreading the stories they publish.

[AnotherAlias]

You made some critical mistakes here. Tokens aren't cards and paper rules currently don't support conjuring (Arena digital-only mechanic). Tokens don't have mana cost unless they're copying something - but not on their own. Putting tokens on the battlefield under your control after creating is simply redundant and isn't needed to be worded. The entire ability must be rewritten as "Create a 1/1 white and blue Human Wizard creature token named Masked Apprentice with "You may have Masked Apprentice enter the battlefield as a copy of a nonlegendary creature you control." And I guess if you wanted the second ability to blink said tokens - it won't work because tokens cease to exist when they leave the battlefield.

I mean, they aren't used often, so I understand what you mean, but token cards have been used before, though only on unset cards (originally used on Gunk Slug, used in Unfinity on Claire D'Loon, Joy Sculptor). Token cards, unlike tokens, exist between zones, as stated by Claire D'Loon's reminder text (I probably should of added the reminder text, but the card was long enough already). The "Put it onto the battlefield" part is necessary. The mana cost on the token just exists so that one can play it from hand.