The MCC Discussion Thread

[bravelion83]

And now, welcome to Leo's MCC news! I have several things, so I'll just write them in a single post.

First, February Round 3 is up. The clarification spoiler is currently empty because I wanted to get the thread out asap. I'll go write it as soon as I'm done with this post. If you have any questions concerning Round 3 in the meantime, just post them right here as usual.

Second, thanks for the congratulations for winning January. It's my first MCC win on Nexus by the way! Of course my thanks also go to the host, judges, and fellow players for a fun (even though long) month. As slimytrout pointed out in the final round thread, we have a winner for the January MCC in March! Regardless of the fact that it's myself, I find it's a really too slow pace, but I don't know if something can be done about it and what. I've brought up this problem before, both here on Nexus and on Salvation in the past, but it looks to me like it only got worse over time. February isn't looking like much of an improvement, with Round 3 launching on the first day of the following month and still one more round to go later. This is very probably linked to the decrease in the player participation in the contest, which is another problem. Currently, I have no ideas about what to do to solve either of them, but if any of you have some, please don't hesitate to share them here.

Third, because I know there are people who like to know the thought process behind a card, I wanted to share mine for Valnik. I've done something which I normally don't do, which is write everything down while I was designing the card. It's usually all in my head, but for this round I've decided to make an exception because I knew it would have been hard. I've done the same for my DCC card from yesterday, the last day of February, but I'll talk about that in the proper thread. Instead, what I'll show you right here and right now are the design notes for Valnik that I've kept in a Google doc since the very first day the final round for January was posted, specifically for the very purpose of eventually posting them here once the round would have been over. I had decided I would have posted these design notes here regardless of whether I would have won or not. So here you go. I'd especially like @slimytrout to read at least the beginning, and @void_nothing will also find the answer to why and how I've come up with the name Valnik if he's interested in that. I'll put these in spoiler tags because they are long and the post is already long as it is.

The card (for those who haven't seen it and for reference)

Show

Hide

Valnik, Boros Guidelight 2R{R/W}{R/W}W
Legendary Creature — Angel Warrior (M)
Flying, first strike, haste
Whenever one or more creatures you control attack, exile the top card of your library. Attacking creatures get +X/+0 until end of turn, where X is the exiled card's mana value. Until the end of your next turn, you may play that card.
Whenever you cast a spell from exile, you gain life equal to that spell's mana value.
4/4

Design notes for the card

Show

Hide

Editor (still Leo)'s note — The following is literally copypasted from the notes I was writing in real time as I was designing the card. The dates are real. The round thread was posted on February 17th and I saw it almost immediately. I'm also going to format the text with Nexus tags and autocards, but I'm not going to modify anything from the original text. What you see here is what I actually wrote.


February 17th

Many congratulations to @slimytrout for that subchallenge 2! It was a twist I didn't expect, and at first I went "oh my, how do I do it?" I've been involved with this custom card community for many years by now and I don't remember having ever seen something like that in this contest, nor have I ever thought of something like that myself as a host. And as a host, I am very happy with this precedent, it's something that I might also use in a future month I host. Not February though, it's too soon to reuse it and I also have the challenges almost completely planned. But I'm very glad that now this is a weapon in a host's arsenal. Very good job! Now let's try to do it. Let's start by analyzing the challenges.


Subchallenges

Subchallenge 1: Your card's rules text does not include its own name.
Subchallenge 2: Your card satisfies at least one challenge or subchallenge from each of the previous three rounds.

Clarifications

Subchallenge 2: Here's the list for each round: (Leo's note: I'm adding a code to each one for reference.)

Round 1:
1A*Design a creature card with a new creature type.
1B*Your card refers to one or more creature types in its rules text.
1C*Your card is legendary.

Round 2:
2A*Design a non-creature card with a new subtype.
2B*Your card includes a symbol that's not W, U, B, R, G, T, or a generic mana cost.
2C*Your card has flavor text.

Round 3:
3A*Design a card with a new keyword ability or keyword action.
3B*Your card's name includes the name of a Ravnican guild.
3C*Your card's rules text includes the word "named."


I hadn't realized in Round 2 that 2B allowed hybrid mana. I just went to look at that round thread again and apparently nobody else realized it either, maybe @netn10 who was the only one that used twobrid mana, the closest thing in that round to hybrid mana. Nobody used actual hybrid mana that round. Maybe I can use it this round. It's either that or another planeswalker with compleated and Phyrexian hybrid mana. Planeswalkers are now legendary, which would automatically satisfy 1C, but they are also very hard to design. It would be easier to design a legendary creature, or any other card type but planeswalker, and this round looks already hard enough.

So it's 1C and 2B. What do I choose from Round 3? I have already had enough trouble doing that Main Challenge, I don't really want to do that again. About 3C, if I can't use the card name in its rules text, how do I use the word "named"? The only way would be to name a different card, but if I name a card that doesn't exist yet how can the judge know what it's supposed to do and the synergy that's supposed to exist between the card I submit and the one I name? I can't submit two cards or design notes explaining this point. So I should name an already existing card, but which one and why? A random card? No, this doesn't convince me. So the only remaining option is 3B. Which guild? Why not my favorite and the one I identify with, Boros?

So I'd like to do 1C, 2B e 3B, which means a BOROS LEGEND WITH HYBRID MANA.


Main Challenge: Design a card with a new mana cost.

BOROS LEGEND WITH HYBRID MANA

Which hybrid mana costs already exist in Boros colors? Let's do a search. As far as I remember, the only cards with hybrid mana in NEO are Tamiyo in her mana cost and Tatsunari in its rules text, but I want to make sure that I include potential cards from NEO that I'm forgetting about, and NEO isn't in Gatherer yet, so for once I will have to use Scryfall instead.

https://scryfall.com/search?as=grid&ord ... 7BR%2FW%7D

Options with {R/W}:
1 - {R/W}B or {R/W}U enemy version of the cycles {R/W}G from Alara Reborn - NO, IT'S NOT BOROS
2 - N{R/W} with a single hybrid mana and N greater than or equal to 4
3 - N{R/W}{R/W} with double hybrid mana and N greater than or equal to 4
4 - N{R/W}{R/W}{R/W} with triple hybrid mana and N = 1 or greater than or equal to 3 (2 already exists, it's Balefire Liege)
5 - quadruple hybrid mana or more with generic mana
6 - sextuple hybrid mana or more without generic mana
7 - NR{R/W}W with N different from 3 (which is Returned Pastcaller)
8 - any other combination of R, W, and {R/W} with all three present

All options but 1 are valid.


Missing parts in red, comments in blue.


Version 1

NAME, Boros SOMETHING [Archangel? Battleangel? Swordmaster?] NR{R/W}{R/W}W
Legendary Creature — Angel Warrior (R/M?)
Flying, first strike, haste [a mono W keyword, a RW one, and a mono R one, CHECK KEYWORD ORDER!!!]
Battalion — [battalion trigger, CHECK SPELLING], exile the top card of your library. Attacking creatures [NOT "you control" because if this is attacking it means you're already the active player and also to make it work with your teammates' creatures in 2HG and Archenemy.] get +X/+0 until end of turn, where X is the exiled card's mana value. Until the end of your next turn, you may play that card.
Whenever you cast a spell from exile, you gain life equal to that spell's mana value. [This was originally a reflexive trigger at the end of the battalion ability: "When you do, you gain life equal to that card's mana value." Changed to be broader for Johnny, letting it work with other things that allow you to cast a spell from exile, like rebound, madness, suspend, Misthollow Griffin-like cards, and maybe more things that I'm not thinking about right now.]
[Impulsive draw is mono R, the life gain mono W, the bonus to attackers RW and it also helps make this feel more like a combat Angel because neither impulsive draw nor life gain are combat mechanics and I want a combat mechanic besides the keywords.]
(If it fits, but I don't think it does, CHECK IN MSE, flavor text about Boros angels now fighting with the common people of the Legion under Aurelia's command unlike what they did under Razia.)
?/?
[Anyway big enough for Timmy, Johnny has the impulsive draw and life gain ability to work with, Spike gets a big finisher with a possibly aggressive mana cost, which would probably push this to mythic.]

I just realized I totally forgot about this round's subchallenge 1, which is not to mention the card name in its rules text, which battalion totally does. Do I want to change battalion to a normal attack trigger, or keep it for flavor giving up the subchallenge? I will think about it, I still have several days before the deadline.

On second thought, turning battalion into a normal attack trigger still uses the name of the card: "Whenever CARDNAME attacks," so it doesn't solve the problem. "At the beginning of combat" doesn't work either, there are no attacking creatures yet because attackers haven't been declared. Maybe "Whenever one or more creatures you control attack"? More food for thought.


February 18th

Trying that last trigger ("Whenever one or more creatures you control attack") and checking in MSE if flavor text fits.

MSE shows me that only one line of flavor text would fit at maximum. I'll leave it out for the moment.

Also, it doesn't matter for the text submission, but Returned Pastcaller shows me that this kind of mana cost gives the card a gold frame, not a hybrid one like MSE thinks. I've also fixed that in MSE.

As for P/T, I'm trying a 4/4 for six mana for now.

As for the keyword order, Gatherer tells me that's right. Several cards prove that, among which the original Akroma, Mirri, the Cursed (Planar Chaos, not the best precedent but even with the shifted color pie templating is still valid), and Gurmag Swiftwing (Tarkir, much better precedent, with the same exact keywords in the same exact order. I had gotten it right since the beginning!)


Version 2

NAME, Boros SOMETHING [Archangel? Battleangel? Swordmaster?] 2R{R/W}{R/W}W
Legendary Creature — Angel Warrior (M)
Flying, first strike, haste
Whenever one or more creatures you control attack, exile the top card of your library. Attacking creatures get +X/+0 until end of turn, where X is the exiled card's mana value. Until the end of your next turn, you may play that card.
Whenever you cast a spell from exile, you gain life equal to that spell's mana value.
(one line of flavor text?)
4/4

I'll think about the flavor later.


Ravnican names are loosely based on Slavic language, particularly Czech. As I usually do in these cases, to find a name let's translate an appropriate word in that language and go from there. Google Translator, what's the Czech way to say "Angel Warrior"? *checks* "andělský válečník". Ok. The first word is too similar to "angel" and "sky", but the second one looks promising. Valnik? Sounds good to me. Let's go with that for now. What about the title?

https://mtg.fandom.com/wiki/Boros_Legio ... rch#Angels

Warleader sounds good, and later in that page it says they still exist: "The Warleader Angels coordinate the efforts of the garrisons, with the Battleforce Angels as their liaisons. Firemane Angels walk regularly among the soldiers, rooting out any hint of deception or corruption." right before the WAR section. That's good. Now, has the word "Warleader" already been used in some card name? *checks* But of course, Aurelia herself: Aurelia, the Warleader. How could I forget? "Battleforge Angel" could easily turn into just "Battleangel", but it feels too generic to me… Wait, I've just had a flash: "Guidelight". A Boros guardian angel. Good enough for now.


Version 3

Valnik, Boros Guidelight 2R{R/W}{R/W}W
Legendary Creature — Angel Warrior (M)
Flying, first strike, haste
Whenever one or more creatures you control attack, exile the top card of your library. Attacking creatures get +X/+0 until end of turn, where X is the exiled card's mana value. Until the end of your next turn, you may play that card.
Whenever you cast a spell from exile, you gain life equal to that spell's mana value.
(one line of flavor text?)
4/4

Let's go post this for now without flavor text. I'll think more about this in the next few days.


February 19th

Questions to think about:

• 6 or 7 mana?
• How does it compare to, say, Baneslayer Angel?
• Do I want to give the bonus to attackers only until end of combat rather than until end of turn?
• An observation: there is quite a high variance between hitting a land or Emrakul with the implusive draw. +0/+0 and +15/+0 are very different. Do I want this? Maybe it's fine for a mythic?

more to come


February 24th

Ok, I forgot and it's too late now, the deadline has passed. Let's hope for the best. Then I will have to remember to post this after judgments are over.

And as you just saw, I've remembered it. I hope you liked this deep dive into my thoughts. And if you're still here reading after I wrote this long wall of text, thank you. I hope you all have a great day! I'll see you all very soon with another installment of "Leo's design notes" in the DCC discussion thread, probably tomorrow.

[void_nothing]

March's MCC has kicked off! Or, if you so choose, the judge signups are here.

[bravelion83]

My judgments for February Round 3 have been completed. Official combined scores and final round after the judging deadline tomorrow, because judges have until then to edit their judgments and/or scores if they wish to do so.

@void_nothing For March I would have preferred to play, but if you need a second judge, I can do that and withdraw from Round 1. In that case, if you have time and will, I would still like to have my card (Rogahk) judged and scored because I willingly tried to take risks and go outside my comfort zone with him, something I've always said and known I have to get better at. I want to see if and how well I managed to do that.

[slimytrout]

@bravelion83 No, you should play and I'll judge. I was deliberately waiting until the last minute to see if someone else would step forward, but that is seeming less and less likely.

[void_nothing]

Thank you both for extending a hand and you know I'm overjoyed to have either of you any time, but this time I would actually not accept anyone dropping in order to judge, no matter who - the number of contestants is such that I could have judged solo if push came to shove. Still, grateful and humbled all the time by your help and that of everyone else who helps keeps the contests running.

@slimytrout will be the second judge this time.

[bravelion83]

Thank you both. In the meantime, the final round for February is up.

EDIT — And now my judgments for that round are complete and visible in the round thread liked right here above. I will wait until the judging deadline to officially declare the winner, as judges technically have until then to adjust their scores if they want to.

EDIT March 19th — The winner of the February MCC is @slimytrout! Congratulations!

[void_nothing]

@void_nothing bumping this for judging in case you'd forgotten. And if you hadn't forgotten and your plate is just full, I will offer to fill in and judge the other side of the bracket as well for this round.

That's very kind of you and I apologize for the delay without notice. However, I'll be done in a few hours.

[bravelion83]

Subchallenge 2: Your card does not have any creature types that have been printed in the typelines of 50 or more cards

As a guideline for March Round 2's Subchallenge 2, I've made a table going through (well, actually writing a local html page and making the computer go through...) all existing creature types (list taken from the CR) and noting the number of Gatherer results as of NEO, which may or may not correspond to the number of actual cards because of things like DFC, silver-bordered cards, and such. I've made this for myself, but I thought others could find this useful as well. Warning: it's very long, and it took me almost all afternoon to make it.

I've tried but it won't let me put 18 images attached to this post, even though each of them is well within the 256 KiB limit. It says maximum 3 images per post, and I don't want to make a not even double, but sixtuple post. I'll put them on my Google Drive setting them as public and then link them here.

There are three versions, ordered differently.

All creature types in alphabetical order:
page 1
page 2
page 3
page 4
page 5
page 6

By decreasing number of results:
page 1
page 2
page 3
page 4
page 5
page 6

By increasing number of results:
page 1
page 2
page 3
page 4
page 5
page 6

The images are set to public for whoever has the link (for whatever reason it doesn't let me set them as just public on the whole internet), so you all should be able to view them through the above links. Please anybody let me know if you can't see them, either by posting here or by PM'ing me and I'll try to fix them.

Disclaimer: I don't mean for this to be the official source that Subchallenge 2 is checked against, judges are still free to judge however they want. I've only made these as a help to design my own submission and I figured out others could find them useful too. As I said, just consider these guidelines.

[Venedrex]

Thanks for the list bravelion! Also, quick clarifying question for void_nothing, does a multicolored creature with a colorless side as an MDFC still count for the challenge?

[void_nothing]

Thanks for the list bravelion! Also, quick clarifying question for void_nothing, does a multicolored creature with a colorless side as an MDFC still count for the challenge?

Yeah that is 100% okay.

[void_nothing]

Putting out the call for the organizer of April's MCC.

[Venedrex]

I'd like to help out, but lately things have hectic for me. Depending on if I go back to school here my free time should clock in at around 10 mins, which is probably not enough for this sort of undertaking. Although, I wouldn't be surprised if you are far busier than I am, and you pull it off.

[bravelion83]

Main Challenge: "Play an additional land" effects don't count. Burgeoning fits the challenge but Exploration does not.

@void_nothing This is clearly a copy/paste leftover in the clarifications spoiler of April Round 1. Also, any news on judgments for March Round 2? Thanks in advance.

[void_nothing]

April's round 1 and March's round 3 are both open!

[void_nothing]

Doing my March Round 3 and April Round 1 judgments tonight.

EDIT: March Round 3 is finished. April Round 1's scores and the new rounds will come tomorrow.

[bravelion83]

I'm working on a SNC themed month for May. I'm still refining a couple challenges but I think I can do it. I will tell you all, and obviously especially @void_nothing, when I'm ready to claim the month. For now, just be aware that I'm working on it.

I honestly didn't expect to advance in April Round 1. For once, I willingly tried to go out of my comfort zone and took a lot of more or less calculated risks, but it didn't work out. I thought that it was much better to take risks in Round 1 (worst case scenario you're immediately out and you try again next month) than in Round 3 or 4 (you might just kick yourself out of the final round or deny yourself any chances to win the month).

And speaking of Round 3, I have another installment of my design notes to share for those who might be interested, now that the judging phase is over. I had also thought about posting my design notes for Vazra too, but those are actually mostly just a list of precedents for abilities and wording with no real "meat" to it. I struggled a lot with Vazra, but Whirling Strike instead came to me almost immediately. Ready? Here we go!

Leo's design notes for Whirling Strike

Show

Hide

(As usual, what follows is the actual raw text I wrote as I was designing the card. I'm only editing it to add Nexus tags where appropriate, nothing more. What you read here is literally what I wrote. I'm not even going to correct eventual typos, so forgive me if there are any.)

Whirling Strike 1UR
Instant (U)
Exile target creature. Return it to the battlefield under its owner's control at the beginning of the next end step. Another target creature gets +X/+0 until end of turn, where X is the exiled creature's power.
Jeskai techniques are not always subtle. Sometimes all you need to do is to break your enemy's guard with one fist and then hit them hard with your other one.

Name from here: https://tekken.fandom.com/wiki/God_Fist ... rtial_Arts.

I immediately wanted to make a blue flicker card, possibly multicolored. I looked at the mechanical color pie article searching for effects that could synergize with flicker on a low rarity card and while looking at U primary I found -N/-0, which in turn reminded me of +N/+0 in red. The more I searched Gatherer for the single pieces the more I discovered this card is actually quite novel. Also, the more I thought about all the different ways this pair of effects can be used in both single and multiplayer, the more I liked it. You can:
• target two or your creatures, maybe to break a stall when you flicker a non-evasive creature with a good ETB while giving an evasive creature a power boost.
• flicker your opponent's maybe only blocker to remove it for one combat and freeing the way for your boosted attacker as a huge tempo play.
• boost a creature of an opponent you formed an alliance with while removing another opponent's blocker so that your allied opponent can attack another of your common opponents. (Might I have just made a card that Commander players can like because of the political nature of the format?)
• boost your teammate's creature while freeing the way for them in 2HG and Archenemy.

Then I used similar cards from Gatherer to decide the mana cost. All the ways you can use this pushed this towards uncommon. This is definitely not a common. Then I thought about psychographics: Timmy likes to remove a blocker and pump his creatures, there are plenty of tricks to do for Johnny, and Spike has the challenge to use this card in the most optimal way among those I have just listed, and she also likes the tempo play.

Ok, then I decided the effect was locked in. I had to figure out the flavor. I thought of all UR factions I could think of. This didn't feel Izzet or Prismari to me (it's not about instants and sorceries), neither Grixis (not about the graveyard), nor Maestros (for what we've seen so far, this has nothing to do with collecting art, vampires or assassins), nor Temur (just a feel thing). That left Jeskai and I immediately thought of a martial art technique. I wrote the flavor text with that in mind, with breaking the guard representing flicker and the other fist the power boost. Then I searched Google for martial art techniques, and I found the page linked above. Even if it's about a fake martial art from Tekken, it had those two words which I immediately liked: Whirling (the flicker part) Strike (the boosting part). It also fit very well both with the Jeskai and with the flavor text I had just written. I was satisfied with this whole package.

Then I tried thinking about the different parts of the rubric as impartially as I could. What would I say if I were a judge and this card was in my bracket?
Appeal - See above for the psychographics.
Elegance - Looks good to me, easily understandable and I think the text is as short as it can be, and it should fit in the frame, even if I will check in MSE tomorrow when I'm at my pc, now I'm doing this on my tablet.
Viability - I see no problems here, it's all in color, there are both colors represented, as I said this is definitely not common but I don't think it's rare either, and I see no problems with the rules, I even checked the CR looking the linked abilities section and I found no problems with that.
Balance - I think the cost is right given what I've seen on Gatherer. I think it should be playable in limited for sure, constructed maybe in tempo decks, and casual/multiplayer for sure, it's even relevant in different ways in multiplayer as I've said above.
Uniqueness - I thought this just had to be already done, but apparently I'm wrong. This area honestly surprised me, but in a good way, and it's what I usually consider my weakest point.
Flavor - See above. Should be good enough.
Quality - I don't think I've made any mistakes.
Challenges - All done, main and both subs.

Good. Let's go to post this. And this is the end.

[void_nothing]

Yeah, Vazra was a surprising entry from you! I know your style of card design is really clean and professional, and you tend to produce solid cards that have no design problems and that have good play patterns. I also know that innovating for the sake of it usually isn't your priority.

The thing that actually caught you, though, was of course Balance. As I said in judging, I think you missed something in development. You would have had a much better chance in the round if you had used the ability:

"When Vazra dies, if you cast a spell named Vazra's Healing this game, return Vazra from your graveyard to the battlefield at the beginning of your next upkeep. It gains haste until end of turn."

Or even:

"Whenever you cast a spell named Vazra's Healing and X is 5 or more, return Vazra from your graveyard to the battlefield. It gains haste until end of turn."

That first one in particular is very strong in EDH, using the unusual functionality of putting your commander in your graveyard voluntarily. But either is still better than a one-mana Vazra, of course.

[Venedrex]

Is is too late to edit?

Half-joking mostly serious.

I made a big mistake and I'm pretty sure I missed my window to fix it but if there's still a chance I thought I'd ask

@void_nothing

[bravelion83]

Yeah, Vazra was a surprising entry from you! I know your style of card design is really clean and professional, and you tend to produce solid cards that have no design problems and that have good play patterns. I also know that innovating for the sake of it usually isn't your priority.

I had totally missed this post, I'm sorry.

Thank you for the nice words. Innovation isn't my priority indeed, here as in real life. Here I usually prefer to maybe give up a few points in a single category which I know is my weakest one (Uniqueness) to try to gain more by being more solid in all the other areas. For once, as I said, I tried taking a risk by going outside of my comfort zone, but obviously it didn't pay off.

What really happened here, if you're interested, is that I first had the idea of making a MDFC where each side cared about whether the other side had been already cast. The play pattern I wanted was that you would have cast one side and then, later in the game, you could have cast the other side of another physical copy out of your (maybe) 4-of in the deck, and that second copy would have gotten a benefit from you having cast the other side of the first one earlier in the game. One side was never meant to interact with the other on the same physical card, or at least that was the original idea. Then I got so caught up in making the wording work somehow that all my focus was on adjusting each single specific word as best I could and I didn't actually think much about anything else. Interestingly, the original version of Vazra's Healing did NOT use X in its mana cost, I just put it in later to try to make the wording work on the back face. I didn't realize that by making that single move I was screwing up the balance of the other side until of course you pointed it out in your judgment. One of the few actual sentences in my notes for the front face was just "The ability of coming back from the graveyard makes this hard to kill, so maybe I can avoid putting indestructible here." I was obviously thinking about how to differentiate this from the Theros gods. As I said, the rest of the notes is essentially just a series of cards from Gatherer to help with wording.

Well, sometimes you take risks and they don't work out as intended, it happens. I just went to work on the next month, this time probably as host. I still have a couple details left to fix in my challenge plan. I'll let you know when I'm ready to claim May. In the meantime, thank you again for your judgment and your words.

[void_nothing]

Is is too late to edit?

Half-joking mostly serious.

I made a big mistake and I'm pretty sure I missed my window to fix it but if there's still a chance I thought I'd ask

@void_nothing

Unfortunately it is! I'm very sorry about that.

[Venedrex]

Is is too late to edit?

Half-joking mostly serious.

I made a big mistake and I'm pretty sure I missed my window to fix it but if there's still a chance I thought I'd ask

@void_nothing

Unfortunately it is! I'm very sorry about that.

No worries, it was just me being dumb. You'll laugh when you see it.

[bravelion83]

I have intentionally not mentioned Venedrex's edit request in my previous post. I wanted void_nothing to answer first because he's the host this month, so he had the final say on this, and I didn't want to influence his decision either way. For all that matters, I think I have also seen the mistake. Personally, as your opponent, I wouldn't have minded you editing it out, but as a host and author of the guidelines I understand that deadlines are there for a reason and must be enforced. If I end up winning because of this I will obviously take it, but I want to say that I don't really like to win this way. It really doesn't feel fair to me to win like this, again, if I do, but I also wouldn't have wanted to set such a precedent. However this ends, I'm feeling really sorry.

[Venedrex]

I have intentionally not mentioned Venedrex's edit request in my previous post. I wanted void_nothing to answer first because he's the host this month, so he had the final say on this, and I didn't want to influence his decision either way. For all that matters, I think I have also seen the mistake. Personally, as your opponent, I wouldn't have minded you editing it out, but as a host and author of the guidelines I understand that deadlines are there for a reason and must be enforced. If I end up winning because of this I will obviously take it, but I want to say that I don't really like to win this way. It really doesn't feel fair to me to win like this, again, if I do, but I also wouldn't have wanted to set such a precedent. However this ends, I'm feeling really sorry.

Hehe, no problem. I don't think this completion is going to come down to the wire, and even if it did, I would still deserve to lose if that was the case. Don't worry, my color identity is Azorius. More seriously, I have no one to blame but myself for making panicky last minute edits and copy pasting text. That's on me.

P.S. I think your card is awesome, and I think my card has more holes than swiss cheese or no 1. I went in to this naming the card and laughing about how the name reflected my design process and confidence in it.

[bravelion83]

@void_nothing I am ready to claim May, I have just completed my full challenge plan. If you're fine with it, I'll post the judge signup thread tomorrow and Round 1 on the 1st.

[void_nothing]

Go for it!