The DCC Discussion Thread

[Riria]

Yeah, I was referring to the first line. I know that modes are chosen before costs are determined; I thought it wouldn't work because it's worded like a replacement effect without being one.

[OneAndOnly]

Fortifications come to mind as the other "attached to something" cards. They're (It's?) enough of a corner case as to warrant overlooking. "If it was attached to a permanent" might be better wording, though.

[bravelion83]

Yeah, I was referring to the first line. I know that modes are chosen before costs are determined; I thought it wouldn't work because it's worded like a replacement effect without being one.

It lacks one of the words that defines replacement effects: "instead". That's just part of what the spell does, you're not replacing an event with another. The wording might be similar, but this is clearly not a replacement effect. I think you're fine with that part, that's just a part of the spell's instructions.

Fortifications come to mind as the other "attached to something" cards. They're (It's?) enough of a corner case as to warrant overlooking. "If it was attached to a permanent" might be better wording, though.

True, I had forgotten Fortifications. I had thought about proposing exactly that but then I realized that if you say "attached to a permanent", then you are excluding things that enchant players, like Curses, or other things that I would indeed count as corner cases, like for example Spellweaver Volute that enchants a card in a graveyard, and maybe more.

[bravelion83]

@netn10 is our DCC winner for March. Congratulations to them! I believe @void_nothing will host starting tomorrow.

[Rithaniel]

I actually thought April was my turn in the rotation, but my schedule doesn't currently line up perfectly with the midnight posting, so, I'd be okay with void taking the month. Of course, I know he has been having work get in the way, so, void, if posting DCCs would be a strain at all, I could still host.

Also, yes, netn10 has been on a roll with the DCC, as of late.

[bravelion83]

No, I believe it's my mistake. I always have a hard time remembering the rotation. I actually went back to look who hosted last month, saw that you hosted January and went like "ok, January was last month and Rithaniel hosted so it's void's turn!" Uhm... No, last month wasn't January, it was February... my bad. It's indeed your turn. I hope I haven't just made a mess here...

EDIT - I've fixed my OP in today's thread. Thanks for catching this. I will never learn which way the host rotation order goes... I'm sorry. I believe tomorrow it should be your turn to host, @Rithaniel, but if you want to do otherwise, you and @void_nothing can figure it out and reverse the order if you want. I will host again in June regardless of that. Again, this was my bad, I'm really sorry.

[Rithaniel]

No need to worry. I don't think any issue was caused. I was just caught off-guard. However, it did put the idea in my head of maybe requesting that void take April. So, if anything, you might have helped me out a bit.

[wizyard]

congrats to netn10

[bravelion83]

Rainforest Flamekin 3R{G/U}
Creature — Elemental (R)
Convoke, haste
If a green creature convoked Rainforest Flamekin, Rainforest Flamekin enters the battlefield with a trample counter on it.
If a blue creature convoked Rainforest Flamekin, Rainforest Flamekin enters the battlefield with a flying counter on it.
4/4

Votes: bravelion83 (I think it should be uncommon, though)

@Rithaniel I made it a rare because I was worried about it being able to be cast for free. I don't think it's too difficult to do with tokens.

Glass Meadow
Land R
Glass Meadow enters the battlefield tapped.
: Add , , , or .
, , Sacrifice an artifact, creature, or enchantment: Put an artifact or enchantment card with mana value less than or equal to 1 plus the sacrificed permanent's mana value from your hand onto the battlefield.
A thousand works of art, shattered and strewn across the burning sands.

As for your cycle of four-color lands, I guess it's supposed to come from a 4-color faction plane. I have one such world in my plan... you may already have seen me write the name Kolyfar in some flavor texts a while ago, that's exactly it. While I still have several other custom sets to make before getting to that one, I've already thought about the mana fixing for it. If you want people to be able to play 4-color decks without the format just turning into 5-color soup, you need a way to restrict the mana to not be used for things that are the fifth color. I feel like your cycle doesn't do that, though I do like it, and that's why I keep giving it HMs but not votes. I will copy and paste here an extract from the file I'm keeping about that plane just as an example of some ideas to try to solve the problem I've just talked about:

Extract from Kolyfar local file (with parts in Italian translated into English)

Show

Hide

Ideas for mana fixing:

Land (R)
As CARDNAME ETB, choose a color.
T: Add one mana of any color other than the chosen color. Spend this mana only to cast spells that are not the chosen color or to activate abilities of sources that are not the chosen color.

Land (C/U) [Example for the non-B faction (centered in GW with RU as secondary colors), to cycle for all the factions]
CARDNAME ETB tapped.
T: Add G or W. You can't spend this mana to cast a black spell or to activate an ability of a black source.
{G/W}{G/W}, T: Add UR. You can't spend this mana to cast a black spell or to activate an ability of a black source.

Or maybe a version with a static ability:

Land [Example for the non-B faction (centered in GW with RU as secondary colors), to cycle for all the factions]
You can't cast black spells or activate abilities of black sources.
T: Add G or W.
{G/W}{G/W}, T: Add UR.

[Rithaniel]

As for your cycle of four-color lands, I guess it's supposed to come from a 4-color faction plane.

Well, ostensibly, yes. Any card should have a place to live. However, I didn't have a plane in mind. I was just spitballing ideas because I didn't know what to post on the 19th. Generally, when I do that, I will end up adding flavor as I go and eventually developing the background info into a plane (such as with the tri-color-plus-colorless plane with Hylrene/Juth/Rharmarr/Qyalanaan/Oscrad factions).

As far as four-color factions needing a reason to not be five color, I believe I would disagree. I don't believe you need to funnel the player into particular color combinations. In fact, I think that can hurt the flow of the game more than help it. In constructed, players will be able to get the colors they need by just choosing the correct cards. Meanwhile, in draft, a player in could make use of a Nomad Outpost or a Grove of Crows and Wolves just to help make the commitment to a four-color deck more tenable. For that matter, why would we care that they're playing more colors than the factions we're making up? Like, I don't mind if a person in Ravnica draft combines Gruul, Rakdos, and Golgari to do "Jund-light," nor would I mind if they were to combine Hylrene and Rharmarr to end up at .

Also, I like the idea of dual color land that can filter from those two colors to two different colors. Very cool idea.

[bravelion83]

For that matter, why would we care that they're playing more colors than the factions we're making up?

There is a difference between playing three different Ravnica guilds to make a 3-color deck and playing two 4-color factions to play a 5-color deck. With 3-color decks, you still have variety of play. With 5-color decks, it's just about everybody playing the best cards. That was and still is my concern, but you do raise some interesting points to think about when the time comes. Glad you like those lands, they come from how I see the 4-color factions in Kolyfar: centered in the middle ally color pair with the two outermost colors as support. To follow the example I've made, the RGWU faction is centered in GW with R and U as secondary supporting colors, possibly both in mechanics and flavor. Anyway, as I said, it's still far away in my plan: currently, it's in slot 17 and I'm still writing the story in slot 2... plenty of time left to think about it. In the meantime, thanks for the feedback.

[Riria]

While it is definitely a design goal to stop people from all playing same-ish decks, there's a difference between a *deck* dominating a meta and a *color combination* dominating a meta (even if said color combination is wubrg). If the metagame is 25% jeskai ascendancy combo decks and 25% celestial collonade drago decks that run lightning bolts, the statement "50% of decks are rwu" is technically correct but it doesn't imply archetype dominance. In 2012 standard, two meta decks were a jund midrange deck that splashed white for lingering souls and an abzan control deck that splashed red for two planeswalkers, and they had very different play patterns.

Making it harder on mana bases to support wubrg in a set centered around 4-color factions is *a* way to succesfully diversify the meta, but it's not per se necessary. One could incentivize different archetypes through different wincons, and IMHO both approaches are fine design wise.

[bravelion83]

Making it harder on mana bases to support wubrg in a set centered around 4-color factions is *a* way to succesfully diversify the meta, but it's not per se necessary. One could incentivize different archetypes through different wincons, and IMHO both approaches are fine design wise.

True. It's probably the low-hanging fruit, the easiest way to go but not the only one as you showed with your examples, and yes, I remember those decks, especially the Jund one splashing Lingering Souls. I've always liked Jund, both in Alara standard and in Modern, it's probably one of the color combinations that I like the most to play with. I was playing pure Jund but I was aware of that white splash that a lot of people were playing. As of now, in the Kolyfar set I'm planning to try to achieve the goal of avoiding 5-color soup in two ways: by explicitly excluding the one color the faction is not, just like in those lands that I showed, and by focusing the factions on the two central colors with the two outermost ones acting as support. That's the idea for now. I'll get to the execution in a long time, probably years. I've got a lot more work to do before in my huge custom set/story plan.

[bravelion83]

Anthem of the Rharmarr
Sorcery R
Spend only colorless, white, and/or black mana on X.
Choose one or both if was spent to cast this spell—

• Search your library for two creature cards with mana value X and put them onto the battlefield. Then shuffle.
• Return up to X target cards from your graveyard to your hand.

Rithaniel (I don't know how it works, but it just works)

@netn10 @Rithaniel I assume the intent behind Rithaniel's card is that you always get to choose one regardless of what types of mana you used (like for example if you cast it for X = WWW, CBB, or WWB, which all respect the restriction on X) and instead you choose both if you spent all three specified types of mana. I think splitting the sentence would make it easier to understand: "Choose one. Instead choose both if CWB was spent to cast this spell." Written this way, it should count as a self-replacement effect and work under the rules covering those.

[Rithaniel]

@netn10 @Rithaniel I assume the intent behind Rithaniel's card is that you always get to choose one regardless of what types of mana you used (like for example if you cast it for X = WWW, CBB, or WWB, which all respect the restriction on X) and instead you choose both if you spent all three specified types of mana. I think splitting the sentence would make it easier to understand: "Choose one. Instead choose both if CWB was spent to cast this spell." Written this way, it should count as a self-replacement effect and work under the rules covering those.

This is the correct interpretation of what I intended. Also, reading through it, I agree that I should have probably gone with the "Instead choose both if" route.

[RattingRots]

Torban, Haughty Competitor 1R
Legendary Creature - Dwarf Noble (R)
Effects of instant and sorcery cards you own that deal damage may target creatures, planeswalkers, battles or players. Targets that fail to meet other conditions of these effects or don't have qualities necessary for these effects to resolve are not legal targets.
2/1

RattingRots - It's my 4th time reading this, I give up. just take my vote lol.

The intention was that if you could do something like Shivan Meteor a player or Lava Spike a creature or a battle or something. Tried to avoid creating situations where other effects don't create some kind of rules paradox (i.e. Mugging a player). I'm sure it would still be a rules nightmare, and in any case would also lead to some confusing situations.

[Rithaniel]

The intention was that if you could do something like Shivan Meteor a player or Lava Spike a creature or a battle or something. Tried to avoid creating situations where other effects don't create some kind of rules paradox (i.e. Mugging a player). I'm sure it would still be a rules nightmare, and in any case would also lead to some confusing situations.

I thought the analogy of "tossing a grenade at the comp. rules" was apt.

[void_nothing]

Not that the wordiness required really would win any elegance contests, and not that it's actually the same functionally, but... could this not have been a damage redirection activated ability?

[RattingRots]

I thought the analogy of "tossing a grenade at the comp. rules" was apt.

Yeah, also thought about saying "deal 3 damage to the comprehensive rules".

Not that the wordiness required really would win any elegance contests, and not that it's actually the same functionally, but... could this not have been a damage redirection activated ability?

That occurred to me today. I think that'd be the way to go if this card were to actually be printed.

[Rithaniel]

Rithaniel

Show

Hide

I loved reading about your planes. You know, I have a table with 13 named ones (you all have heard about some of them at one point or another, but not all of them yet) and 4 more still unnamed ones, 17 total, and not a single one is even remotely similar to any of yours. Between the two of us we have more than twenty potential new original planes. This goes to show how much design space is still left in Magic, at least in ideas for new planes.

Yeah, I remember your mention of the 13 planes you've made. I'd argue that this large number of fictional planes is mostly reflective of worldbuilding being a very deep hobby. There are lots of worlds you can make, not even necessarily connected to MtG.

I just like making Magic cards because gives a framework to build off of.

[RattingRots]

Ferocity of the Juth
Sorcery U
Choose one—

• Target creature gains haste and first strike until end of turn.
• Untap and gain control of target creature with haste until end of turn.
• Target creature with first strike gains double strike until end of turn.

Entwine (Choose all if you pay the entwine cost. can be paid with either or .)

Rithaniel (It feels undercosted, but making it cost 1 more feels like too much. Which is exactly the kind of design my inner Melvin-Spike likes.)

I think the "normal cost" is fine, but the entwine might want to cost 4.

This is a very clever card design, and I also think (if it hasn't been done) just a straight up Act of Treason that gave double strike would be really fun to play.

[Rithaniel]

I think the "normal cost" is fine, but the entwine might want to cost 4.

This is a very clever card design, and I also think (if it hasn't been done) just a straight up Act of Treason that gave double strike would be really fun to play.

It feels undercosted, but making it cost 1 more feels like too much. Which is exactly the kind of design my inner Melvin-Spike likes.

I'm glad you guys like the design. I thought it turned out pretty well.

On the cost: my thoughts at the time were along the lines of "more colored mana = more difficult to cast = can be stronger." An earlier version of the card had the entwine cost be , but then I decided that those extra colors would detract from the design. Would the evaluation on the power have been the same in that case? What if the entwine cost had been ?

[bravelion83]

Rebirth Ritual 2GW
Sorcery (U)
Return target permanent card from your graveyard to your hand. You gain 2 life.
Tradition — If there are three or more cards that share a card type with Rebirth Ritual in your graveyard, return that card to the battlefield instead.
A child being born is always considered a happy event. An ancestor being reborn even more so.

bravelion83 (although I'm not sure if the 2 life still takes effect if you fulfill Tradition)

It should, or at least it was my intention that it would. I wanted to make it as a self-replacement effect partially replacing the effect of the spell, specifically the destination of the card (the battlefield instead of your hand) while leaving everything else untouched, including the life gain. I think there are precedents for this kind of wording, though I can't think of any at the moment. I will have to do a little research, which is not bad, as I intend to include this mechanic in my next custom set in my big plan so I should make sure it works as intended...

Research

Show

Hide

614.15. Some replacement effects are not continuous effects. Rather, they are an effect of a resolving spell or ability that replace part or all of that spell or ability's own effect(s). Such effects are called self-replacement effects. The text creating a self-replacement effect is usually part of the ability whose effect is being replaced, but the text can be a separate ability, particularly when preceded by an ability word. When applying replacement effects to an event, self-replacement effects are applied before other replacement effects.

It does indeed qualify as a self-replacement effect that replaces only part of the spell's effects leaving the rest untouched. Now I'll go to see if I find any existing similar precedents.

I've found precedents in both directions.

Some cards from Origins indeed replace only part of the effect: Gather the Pack (you still put the rest into your graveyard), Nissa's Pilgrimage (you still reveal the cards, put one onto the battlefield and then shuffle), Talent of the Telepath (you still put the rest into your graveyard). Also See the Unwritten from Tarkir (you still put the rest into your graveyard).

Other cards instead repeat parts of the spell ability they replace, like Traverse the Ulvenwald, Primal Growth, Once and Future (notice how it repeats the word "exile").

I think the CR supports replacing only part of the effect like I did, but here I have to put my usual disclaimer that I'm just a huge rules fan, not an official judge. I wonder if the position of the life gain would influence the answer, like this:

Rebirth Ritual 2GW
Sorcery (U)
You gain 2 life. Return target permanent card from your graveyard to your hand.
Tradition — If there are three or more cards that share a card type with Rebirth Ritual in your graveyard, return that card to the battlefield instead.
A child being born is always considered a happy event. An ancestor being reborn even more so.

Or maybe it would be even better to just put the life gain on its own line which should make it its own separate ability:

Rebirth Ritual 2GW
Sorcery (U)
You gain 2 life.
Return target permanent card from your graveyard to your hand.
Tradition — If there are three or more cards that share a card type with Rebirth Ritual in your graveyard, return that card to the battlefield instead.
A child being born is always considered a happy event. An ancestor being reborn even more so.

Maybe this last one is the cleanest solution. I think I will adopt this last one in my custom set for now. Thanks for having spurred me to do this research.

[RattingRots]

On the cost: my thoughts at the time were along the lines of "more colored mana = more difficult to cast = can be stronger." An earlier version of the card had the entwine cost be , but then I decided that those extra colors would detract from the design. Would the evaluation on the power have been the same in that case? What if the entwine cost had been ?

That's true, but for one thing I would generally assume any kind of weird mana cost is something that the environment its in makes it possible to cast without downsides that are that prohibitive. Obviously it could depend on what kind of environment you're imagining for it. And UG doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. The individual effects and the entwine add up to something that can really only be monored IMO. The other thing is I think paying 4 mana to steal something for a turn and give it double strike is actually really strong already and my guess is with that cost people wouldn't feel like they don't get to do something exciting because they had to pay 4.

@bravelion83 Regardless of what the rules actually do, I'd go with the second option (put gain 2 life on it's own line) because it's more intuitive.

[bravelion83]

As a newcomer to this game, I'm curious to know what happens if there is a tie for the most votes in a day's card submissions.

@charliejone Every day, the winner gets 2 extra points if they win solo. If there is a tie involving any number of players, all tied players receive 1 extra point instead. You can find all the rules in each day's thread OP. Please pay attention to post in the current day's thread (today is the 15th, you posted this question in the thread for the 9th) and to use the daily thread only for submissions. Questions, comments, etc... that don't involve actual submissions belong here in the discussion thread instead. If you want to post short comments in your submission post in the daily thread you can do that (unlike for example in the MCC, remember that different contests have different rules), but please remember to put them into spoiler tags if they're on the longer side. If you want to participate, you're more than welcome to post a card in today's thread.

Maybe we should advertise on Reddit, particularly on the main sub and the custom cards sub...

@netn10 I wouldn't be opposed to that but can't do it as I don't have a reddit account. I do read some subreddits though, and it looks to me like these days wouldn't be the best to do that... if I've understood correctly, a big protest is going on there for their own reasons I won't get into. I believe most people there have other thoughts right now, but if you want to do that I'd be all for it, it's just the timing that doesn't look the best to me. If anybody who has a reddit account wants to do it, I'd say go for it.