The MCC Discussion Thread

User avatar
Rithaniel
Posts: 2695
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Rithaniel » 1 year ago

I'm not sure I follow your first paragraph very well, but that might be because I'm tired.
OneAndOnly wrote:
1 year ago
Why is the contest sieving out W/UB cards, but not B/UW or U/WB cards?
Because the whole point of the challenge is to encourage you guys to explore under-explored color spaces. The first one is being filtered out because it has been done far more than the other two.
OneAndOnly wrote:
1 year ago
Why am I designing this card?
Okay, why do you design cards? You've played in the DCC. You know how to design without any constraints at all. How could this constraint remove all possible functionality of the card? I don't understand your objection.
Last edited by Rithaniel 1 year ago, edited 1 time in total.
And a Few Quotes
Show
Hide
"Why are numbers beautiful? It's like asking why is Beethoven's Ninth Symphony beautiful. If you don't see why, someone can't tell you. I know numbers are beautiful. If they aren't beautiful, nothing is."
― Paul Erdős

“I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops.”
― Stephen Jay Gould

User avatar
void_nothing
Look On My Sash...
Posts: 14924
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 124
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Tal Terig, Zendikar

Post by void_nothing » 1 year ago

The organizers of the MCC and every contest on this forum are all volunteers who donate their time and effort for others to be able to compete and have fun. As such, it's every organizer's prerogative to run their month as they choose within the rules of the contest and those of the forums.

With that in mind, I'd like if everyone would please not argue about the merits of the actual challenge. Everyone is free to dislike it and therefore not play for the month - which is all the right everybody else has over the organizer as long as no forum rules are being broken.
Psst, check the second page of Custom Card Contests & Games! Because of the daily contests, a lot of games fall down to there.

The greatest (fake) pro wrestling on the internet - Collaborative Create-A-Booster - My random creations (updated regularly)

Important Facts: Colorless is not a color, Wastes is not a land type, Changeling is not a creature type

User avatar
OneAndOnly
Posts: 2285
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by OneAndOnly » 1 year ago

SPOILER
Show
Hide
Okay, so you've built up some internal rationale.

Why wasn't the criteria expressed this way? Even you seem to have appreciated someone else coming along and saying, "Hey, is this what you actually meant?"

Can you really explore under-explored color space with such limited and limiting criteria? Given comments like "It would be an Esper card that does <this> instead of <that>" -- is it really exploring it at all? Would the space be less explored if you asked for, say, a tri-color card as the general criterion, with "meet this very specific requirement" as the bonus, instead? (And why are the secondary and tertiary criteria so frequently graded just as highly as the primary criteria?)

Given the other criteria; why is U(w/b) more of a successful response than Uwb? (IE, a blue card that has an activated ability that has a hybrid mana cost, versus a blue card that has one activated ability with a white mana cost, and a second activated ability with a black mana cost).

My long-term goal is to build up enough of a card reservoir to create a full set or two; I feel a lot of board members share this criteria. Maybe it's just my own personal goal. I don't expect every round of every game to put any energy toward that goal, but making cards that requires such extraordinary minutiae can't possibly fit in well with most sets that most players want to make (judging from custom sets presented on this board.)

Another common goal is simply, to make cards I would want to play. I think this is another real common failing of contest rounds; the resulting cards are designed to meet the game's challenges, but there are few that I look at and say, "Yeah, I'd try that in a deck."
@void_nothing; I was editing my comment before your post, so I'm going to comment it out, and let things sit.

User avatar
Rithaniel
Posts: 2695
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Rithaniel » 1 year ago

I'll spoiler too
Show
Hide
OneAndOnly wrote:
1 year ago
Even you seem to have appreciated someone else coming along and saying, "Hey, is this what you actually meant?"
No no, not at all. I knew exactly what I meant from the very beginning. Every way that it has so far been expressed, I fully understood and was capable of expressing it that way. Compare my original explanation (the one) to void's most recent "full list" explanation. The one I complimented him on. I did the same explanation, but I was just trying to express it without making a huge list, which turned out to be necessary.
OneAndOnly wrote:
1 year ago
Can you really explore under-explored color space with such limited and limiting criteria?
What are you talking about? If you have a three-color identity, and have to pick one or two colors for the card to be, there are six ways to do so. I removed two of those six options. You are barely any more restricted than if I were to have, say "make a card with three colors in its identity that isn't all of those colors." The thing is that you just never see anything other than those two options that I specifically disallowed. You have most of the space still available.
OneAndOnly wrote:
1 year ago
Given the other criteria; why is U(w/b) more of a successful response than Uwb?
Are you also going to question why rares and mythics are more of a success than commons and uncommons, too? Or is this specific to the use of hybrid mana?
OneAndOnly wrote:
1 year ago
extraordinary minutiae
What minutiae? The challenge is just "use these colors, use some hybrid man, and make it rare." You can make millions of cards within just picking a single three-color combination.
And a Few Quotes
Show
Hide
"Why are numbers beautiful? It's like asking why is Beethoven's Ninth Symphony beautiful. If you don't see why, someone can't tell you. I know numbers are beautiful. If they aren't beautiful, nothing is."
― Paul Erdős

“I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops.”
― Stephen Jay Gould

User avatar
bravelion83
MKM MCC going on now
Posts: 4039
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Florence, Italy

Post by bravelion83 » 1 year ago

My own judgments for December Round 3 have been posted. Final round coming as soon as I can.

EDIT And here it is.
Author of the MCC Guidelines and FAQ. | For my projects, including Jeff Lionheart, my murder mystery story "One pierced heart, two mindful horns", and republished articles from my series "The Lion's Lair", see Leo's content index (Last updated on March 24th 2024 - Added OPHTMH Episode 4).
After I'm done republishing my articles I want to reprise the series focusing it more on editing, wording, and templating. Suggest potential future article topics here.
My CCCG Resume (Updated on February 27th 2024)
Show
Hide
Blue = MTGSalvation Green = MTGNexus
MCC - Winner (9): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019, Jan Mar 2022, Apr 2023 || Host (30): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last on MTGS), Aug 2019 (first on MTGN) Oct 2019, Jan Jun 2020 Apr Oct 2021, Feb May Sep Dec 2022, Mar Jun Sep Dec 2023, Mar 2024 || Judge (58): every month from Nov 2014 to Nov 2016 except Oct 2015, every month from Feb to Jul 2017 except Apr 2017, then Oct 2017, May Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last on MTGS), every month from Aug 2019 (first on MTGN) to Feb 2020, May Jun 2020, Mar Apr Sep Oct 2021, Feb May Sep Dec 2022, Mar May Jun Sep Dec 2023, Jan Mar 2024
CCL - Winner (4): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last on MTGS), Jun 2021 (tied with slimytrout) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016
DCC - Winner (3): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar), Feb Apr 2022 || Host (12): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016, Jun Sep Dec 2021, Mar Jun Sep Dec 2022, Mar Jun 2023

haywire
Posts: 337
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by haywire » 1 year ago

@bravelion83: I had a question on this deduction. It doesn't affect anything, I suffered from my usual problem of getting overexcited and trying to put a novel on a card, but I just wanted to clarify, since I did look specifically into this problem.
bravelion83 wrote:
1 year ago
"...X is eight or more" should be "...X is 8 or more", with a numeral. (-0.5, see Shatterskull Smashing from ZNR, Silver Scrutiny from DMU, and the Finale cycle from WAR for recent examples) Interestingly, you do use a numeral later in the rules text when you check the mana value in the second mode. That's correct, but you should have done that with the check on the value of X in the first mode too. This card goes well beyond the limits of microtext, and that impacts here too. (-0.5, see Elegance)
I looked into the wording for the two "X is ..." phrases, both to determine numeral vs written, and more vs greater. I couldn't find any examples of "If X is {num} or more" that didn't also have a mana value of X, but in other cases, where it was simply comparing things, it seemed like for attributes that were expressed numerically, the conditional was expressed as a numeral, such as with life, damage, mana value or power. However, in any situation where the attribute wasn't specifically tied to a numeral, such as cards in a zone, counters, or modes, a number word was used for the number. Specifically, as in Agent of Treachery and Arvinox, the Mind Flail , a number word is used to reference permanents on the field.

My use of X is unique as far as I know, in that it is the first time X is used in a comparison where X is not derived from mana cost. Mana cost is in the first category I outlined above, a numerical attribute. In my card, however, X is derived from permanents on the field, which, as shown, would be counted with a word if X were not involved, so I believe should be referenced by a word when X is involved as well.

I could still be wrong, but I did put far too much effort into that specific phrase initially, so I would like to make my case regardless.

Thanks again for all the work you do judging and running these things! (And don't worry, I don't take the judgements personally at all.)

User avatar
bravelion83
MKM MCC going on now
Posts: 4039
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Florence, Italy

Post by bravelion83 » 1 year ago

haywire wrote:
1 year ago
I suffered from my usual problem of getting overexcited and trying to put a novel on a card
I put novels in judgments instead... at least I have more room to work with! I'm not constrained by a small text box on a piece of cardboard! I don't know yet, but you might be about to read another one...
haywire wrote:
1 year ago
for attributes that were expressed numerically, the conditional was expressed as a numeral, such as with life, damage, mana value or power. However, in any situation where the attribute wasn't specifically tied to a numeral, such as cards in a zone, counters, or modes, a number word was used for the number.
Yeah, this looks all correct to me. I tend to know instinctively what should be expressed as a numeral and what as a number word by now, probably due to almost twenty years of experience reading, playing, and thinking about Magic cards, but your reasoning looks absolutely correct to me, 100%.

About the specific case of your card:
haywire wrote:
1 year ago
These tokens enter the battlefield tapped unless X is eight or more.
The point about your specific situation is that while you're correct that the value of X is derived from a quantity that is expressed by a number word, the value itself of X is a number, and you can't compare a number with a number word. You even define yourself in your card X as a number (emphasis mine):
bravelion83 wrote:
1 year ago
where X is the number of Powerstones you control.
Speaking mathematically, you can't write:

X > "eight"

Rather, you write it as:

X > 8

I don't know how much you know about programming languages and the types of variables there, but the former comparison is comparing a variable type "number" with a variable type "string". If you were to run a program or script that tries to do such a comparison, it would return some kind of error, probably something like "not a number". To fix that error, you would have to turn that string into a number and then compare them, which is what you do in the latter case. I know Javascript for example, and in that language there are specific functions and methods that convert one type of variable into another. The problem in your case is that the types of the variables you're trying to compare do not match. You take a string ("eight Powerstone tokens"), convert it into a number with your definition of X ("the number of Powerstone tokens is 8", or "there are 8 Powerstone tokens"), and then try to compare what is now a number (X) with a string ("eight or more"). By the way, if you think about it, it doesn't even make sense to write that "or more" part if "eight" is a string. How can a string, not a number, be "more than" something else?
haywire wrote:
1 year ago
I could still be wrong, but I did put far too much effort into that specific phrase initially
I may just as easily be wrong too, but that was my reasoning. Of course, in my head it was just a thought that came in seconds and I wrote that right away, but now you've made me focus more on it by asking me to explain it and honestly I'm even more convinced now than a few hours ago when I wrote that judgment. Again, I can just be the one who's actually wrong, but that was essentially my thought process, and anyway don't worry! Explaining things is my job, I'm a professional high school teacher. I always tell my students on the first lesson with a new group or class something like: "Please don't ever be afraid to ask if you don't understand something, there are no stupid questions, and it may just be my fault for not having been able to explain myself properly. If it's needed, I will explain the same thing to you a hundred times, trying different approaches as they come to my mind." The same exact thing applies here too on these boards, and also in life in general, at least in my opinion. The comparison I've just made with programming languages just came to me right now for example, I didn't think about it as I was writing your card's judgment. If I had thought of it I would have probably written it in there, only to make the novel even longer... but at least I hope it also helped made it clearer now.

Also, I want you to know that I appreciate a lot you saying you put a lot of effort into your submission's details. In my opinion, caring about the little details is often undervalued, and this too not just in Magic custom card design, but in everyday life. You have to be able to both care about the little details and to see the big picture at the same time. They are both very important. I think that if you were a student of mine I'd have a quite high opinion of you, and I'd tell you not to be disappointed if you didn't get as high of a mark as you may have hoped. I'm sure you will do better at our next written test! Another thing I always tell to my students is that I, and most teachers actually, want to give them good marks. We want to see them doing well. We are not happy when we have to give out bad marks, despite what many of them might think. I tell them that it's their responsibility to allow us to be able to give them the good marks that we want to give them. The same exact thing is true here. I want to give good scores. I'm never happy as a judge when I can't give players the good scores I want to give them because they didn't allow me to. I really like your approach. You'd make for an excellent student of mine, I'm sure. Please keep trying.
haywire wrote:
1 year ago
Thanks again for all the work you do judging and running these things!
Thank you for being a part of them. Don't worry, I do all of this just because I like it and I have (probably too much) fun doing it. If I didn't like it, I wouldn't be doing it. Nobody is forcing me to do anything, and I don't want to force anybody to do anything in return.
haywire wrote:
1 year ago
(And don't worry, I don't take the judgements personally at all.)
That was never my worry. I had no worries actually. I just wanted to make you a gift and you told me last time you liked my digression, so I wanted to make another one for you. I just had no idea what it would have been about when I started writing your card's judgment. Last time it was Italian verb tenses, who knew what it would have been this time? Then it just came naturally, and naturally the memories flowed in my mind and I just wrote them essentially as a stream of consciousness. Now I tell you "don't worry", because as I told you last time, more will surely come, and not just in your judgments. It might happen while judging anybody's card. It just happens that this time it was the only digression in my whole bracket, but often there are multiple ones, sometimes even in the same judgment. As I said, please just bear with me.

If you need more explanations, I tell you the same thing as to my students: don't be afraid to ask! You will always find me here ready and happy to write another novel for you!
Author of the MCC Guidelines and FAQ. | For my projects, including Jeff Lionheart, my murder mystery story "One pierced heart, two mindful horns", and republished articles from my series "The Lion's Lair", see Leo's content index (Last updated on March 24th 2024 - Added OPHTMH Episode 4).
After I'm done republishing my articles I want to reprise the series focusing it more on editing, wording, and templating. Suggest potential future article topics here.
My CCCG Resume (Updated on February 27th 2024)
Show
Hide
Blue = MTGSalvation Green = MTGNexus
MCC - Winner (9): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019, Jan Mar 2022, Apr 2023 || Host (30): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last on MTGS), Aug 2019 (first on MTGN) Oct 2019, Jan Jun 2020 Apr Oct 2021, Feb May Sep Dec 2022, Mar Jun Sep Dec 2023, Mar 2024 || Judge (58): every month from Nov 2014 to Nov 2016 except Oct 2015, every month from Feb to Jul 2017 except Apr 2017, then Oct 2017, May Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last on MTGS), every month from Aug 2019 (first on MTGN) to Feb 2020, May Jun 2020, Mar Apr Sep Oct 2021, Feb May Sep Dec 2022, Mar May Jun Sep Dec 2023, Jan Mar 2024
CCL - Winner (4): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last on MTGS), Jun 2021 (tied with slimytrout) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016
DCC - Winner (3): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar), Feb Apr 2022 || Host (12): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016, Jun Sep Dec 2021, Mar Jun Sep Dec 2022, Mar Jun 2023

slimytrout
Posts: 1861
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by slimytrout » 1 year ago

bravelion83 wrote:
1 year ago
The animation effect has no duration. Those kind of effects usually have the reminder text "This effect lasts indefinitely." I expected it to be here too. (-0.5)
I certainly don't want it to seem as if I'm complaining about a nearly perfect score -- to be honest, there are a few places where I would have deducted at least half a point from myself if I were judging, most notably uniqueness due to the existence of Rise and Shine, but I actually don't quite agree with this deduction, since of the four cards that do a similar thing (Rise and Shine, Workshop Elders, Animating Faerie // Bring to Life, and Kenku Artificer) not a single one has any sort of reminder text. Admittedly, three of those cards were printed in eternal-only sets and the fourth had an adventure frame, but there are plenty of premier set cards that permanently animate things with no reminder text, most recently Tatyova, Steward of Tides. In fact, as far as I can tell the last new card to be printed with this sort of reminder text was Spectral Shift in Fifth Dawn.

User avatar
void_nothing
Look On My Sash...
Posts: 14924
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 124
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Tal Terig, Zendikar

Post by void_nothing » 1 year ago

slimytrout wrote:
1 year ago
bravelion83 wrote:
1 year ago
The animation effect has no duration. Those kind of effects usually have the reminder text "This effect lasts indefinitely." I expected it to be here too. (-0.5)
I certainly don't want it to seem as if I'm complaining about a nearly perfect score -- to be honest, there are a few places where I would have deducted at least half a point from myself if I were judging, most notably uniqueness due to the existence of Rise and Shine, but I actually don't quite agree with this deduction, since of the four cards that do a similar thing (Rise and Shine, Workshop Elders, Animating Faerie // Bring to Life, and Kenku Artificer) not a single one has any sort of reminder text. Admittedly, three of those cards were printed in eternal-only sets and the fourth had an adventure frame, but there are plenty of premier set cards that permanently animate things with no reminder text, most recently Tatyova, Steward of Tides. In fact, as far as I can tell the last new card to be printed with this sort of reminder text was Spectral Shift in Fifth Dawn.
This is correct in this particular case particularly because the +1/+1 counters are the reminder the effect is active.
Psst, check the second page of Custom Card Contests & Games! Because of the daily contests, a lot of games fall down to there.

The greatest (fake) pro wrestling on the internet - Collaborative Create-A-Booster - My random creations (updated regularly)

Important Facts: Colorless is not a color, Wastes is not a land type, Changeling is not a creature type

haywire
Posts: 337
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by haywire » 1 year ago

bravelion83 wrote:
1 year ago
The point about your specific situation is that while you're correct that the value of X is derived from a quantity that is expressed by a number word, the value itself of X is a number, and you can't compare a number with a number word. You even define yourself in your card X as a number (emphasis mine):
Just for clarity here, I'd like to differentiate between a number, an integer, and a number word. In all of the examples I've given, all of the values are numbers. That's the information that is stored. However, they are grouped into things treated as integers, and things treated as number words.


I can speak in terms of programming languages; I'm a software engineer by trade, though my JS is a bit rusty, so forgive any language errors there.
bravelion83 wrote:
1 year ago
Speaking mathematically, you can't write:

X > "eight"

Rather, you write it as:

X > 8
This relies on the assumption that X is an integer. If X is a string, X > "eight" is valid* and X > 8 would not be, for the same reasons that you gave.

*In base language, the comparison is valid but likely meaningless, since it would run the comparison alphabetically. However, library functions exist in C++ that allow number word comparisons, and I would assume the same exists in the npm for JS.

My whole argument is that X is being set to a number word in this case, since the input value is a number word.

Looking at the line:
haywire wrote:
1 year ago
Mill X cards, then create X Powerstone tokens, where X is the number of Powerstones you control. These tokens enter the battlefield tapped unless X is eight or more.
If X wasn't involved, and this was just a static effect, it would read something like:
haywire wrote:
1 year ago
Mill four cards, then create four Powerstone tokens. These tokens enter the battlefield tapped unless you control eight or more Powerstones.
The values that would be replacing X are strings, so X should be set to a string in this case. X should be "seven" or "eight" or whatever, not 7 or 8, because the constant you're setting it to is "seven" or "eight" and there's no formal magic rule that X is an int rather than a generic (var for autotype in JS iirc? or auto?).

Therefore, since I believe X should be a string, the comparison should be a string as well.

I truly think it could go either way. Your logic is more intuitive and would create more consistency with other X cards because all other X comparisons are derived from integer attributes, but I believe my argument is more robust and creates the most consistency with the rules of card attributes at large.

User avatar
Venedrex
Wait, we can have titles?
Posts: 1411
Joined: 3 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Venedrex » 1 year ago

Sir, this is an MTG forum.
SPOILER
Show
Hide
Just Kidding

Funnily enough, I too am trying to become a software engineer lol.
Epicurean, EDH without Universes Beyond.

http://nxs.wf/np748831

User avatar
void_nothing
Look On My Sash...
Posts: 14924
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 124
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Tal Terig, Zendikar

Post by void_nothing » 1 year ago

Venedrex wrote:
1 year ago
Sir, this is an MTG forum.
SPOILER
Show
Hide
Just Kidding
Well I have a loose conviction that rules text is basically a
SPOILER
Show
Hide
programming language in the first place
Psst, check the second page of Custom Card Contests & Games! Because of the daily contests, a lot of games fall down to there.

The greatest (fake) pro wrestling on the internet - Collaborative Create-A-Booster - My random creations (updated regularly)

Important Facts: Colorless is not a color, Wastes is not a land type, Changeling is not a creature type

haywire
Posts: 337
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by haywire » 1 year ago

void_nothing wrote:
1 year ago
Venedrex wrote:
1 year ago
Sir, this is an MTG forum.
SPOILER
Show
Hide
Just Kidding
Well I have a loose conviction that rules text is basically a
SPOILER
Show
Hide
programming language in the first place
At minimum it's a formal grammar

User avatar
Rithaniel
Posts: 2695
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Rithaniel » 1 year ago

MtG rules are actually Turing complete. Some students published a paper on it. Kyle Hill then made the deck that acts like a Turing machine.
And a Few Quotes
Show
Hide
"Why are numbers beautiful? It's like asking why is Beethoven's Ninth Symphony beautiful. If you don't see why, someone can't tell you. I know numbers are beautiful. If they aren't beautiful, nothing is."
― Paul Erdős

“I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops.”
― Stephen Jay Gould

haywire
Posts: 337
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by haywire » 1 year ago

Rithaniel wrote:
1 year ago
MtG rules are actually Turing complete. Some students published a paper on it. Kyle Hill then made the deck that acts like a Turing machine.
It's not the rules that are Turing complete, it's the subset of cards, if you're referencing the paper from 2019. A small distinction but important

User avatar
bravelion83
MKM MCC going on now
Posts: 4039
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Florence, Italy

Post by bravelion83 » 1 year ago

I've made additional research on both slimytrout's and haywire's cases, and here are the conclusions I've come to.

As for slimytrout, he's 100% correct. Somehow, I didn't manage to find in my original research those examples he mentions. He's also right about the last new card to have that reminder text being Spectral Shift from Fifth Dawn. If we just count any printing of any cards in premier sets, there is one from Tenth Edition (Mind Bend), but that's a reprint and was originally printed in Mirage, but interestingly without that reminder text. It looks like actually the "lasts indefinitely" reminder text is only found on the current Oracle text of old cards that have been printed with the "doesn't end at end of turn" one. I was convinced that reminder text had been used on more recent cards, even in recent sets, but I was wrong. He's just right and I apologize. I'm giving him that half point back as soon as I'm finished writing this.

As for haywire, it's more complex. There are no real valid precedents that I've been able to find in more than a full hour of research. I do understand the points he raises and I do understand the logic behind them. It turns out I was speaking to a person that fully knows about programming languages professionally without even knowing it. He could probably teach me about that.

My experience with Javascript comes from running a few websites several years ago. I don't do that anymore, but from time to time I do still use Javascript if I need to write a quick local script to have the computer perform some long and tedious tasks in my place. I know absolutely zero about C++ other than it exists. I've also heard about the "Turing complete" thing back when it came out, but I haven't read the actual paper and I have no actual competence to talk about that anyway. What I do remember though, if it matters, is that in Javascript the generic declaration for a variable is "var".

Now I'm going to present first my own opinion and then the (not that many actually) results of my research.

First, let me point out that when I was talking about "numbers" being compared in my previous post, he's right, what I actually meant was "integers", speaking from the point of view of a programming language. Variable type "integer", not "number". You can just mentally substitute the word "integer" in place of the word "number" in my previous post.

I agree that Magic rules have a lot in common with both formal grammar and programming languages. I like to call them a "rigorous logical system" to use everyday speech. Honestly, that's a huge part of why they fascinate me and why I love to study them. It's also the problem I had with Steamflogger Boss when it was printed in Future Sight: it was a card with a line of rules text that made no sense in that logical system. Such a system has to be coherent to make sense. Every piece of it has to make sense for it to work, and I read that card essentially as "undefined", which has no place in a logical system. Same thing with "The land continues to burn" on Obsidian Fireheart, but at least that is reminder text with no rules meaning. That's exactly the reason why I instantly gave away for free to a friend of mine at the time all the copies of that card that I opened while playing Zendikar limited. I hated that card just because of that, and honestly I still do.

There are a LOT of existing cards where it looks like the game has to perform a variable type conversion on the value of X in the background. There are way too many examples to be listed here, so I'll just mention the first recent one that I found: Animus of Night's Reach. It says "Whenever Animus of Night's Reach attacks, it gets +X/+0 until end of turn, where X is the number of creature cards in defending player's graveyard." The number of creature cards in a graveyard is written as a string. From my point of view, the game turns it into an integer with the text "where X is the number of..." and then applies that integer as a modification to a value that's appropriately an integer, the Animus's power. That card makes no sense if that X in +X/+0 is a string.

Yet, I haven't been able indeed to find any examples of cards where the value of X is compared to something that is usually expressed with a string. Not just turning a string into an integer to use, but making a comparison with it. I was hoping to find such an example but I had no luck.

So I went back to the CR themselves. I reread all section 107 ("Numbers and symbols"). The very first rule is:
CR (BRO) wrote:107.1. The only numbers the Magic game uses are integers.
Then it goes on to explain that it actually means you can't use fractions (107.1a) and that under ordinary circumstances you can only use "positive numbers and zero" (107.1b and 107.1c). That doesn't actually help as it doesn't talk about strings or anything like that.

I noticed a thing that looks very interesting to me though. Throughout the whole rule 107.3, the one about X, when the rules mention "the value of X" being zero it's always written as a numeral. It's not a definitive rule but it's the closest thing I've been able to find.
CR quotes
Show
Hide
CR (BRO) wrote: 107.3b If a player is casting a spell that has an {X} in its mana cost, the value of X isn't defined by the text of that spell, and an effect lets that player cast that spell while paying neither its mana cost nor an alternative cost that includes X, then the only legal choice for X is 0. (...)

107.3g If a card in any zone other than the stack has an {X} in its mana cost, the value of {X} is treated as 0, even if the value of X is defined somewhere within its text.

107.3h If an effect instructs a player to pay an object's mana cost that includes {X}, the value of X is treated as 0 unless the object is a spell on the stack. In that case, the value of X is the value chosen or determined for it as the spell was cast.

107.3j If an object gains an ability, the value of X within that ability is the value defined by that ability, or 0 if that ability doesn't define a value of X. (...)

107.3m If an object's enters-the-battlefield triggered ability or replacement effect refers to X, and the spell that became that object as it resolved had a value of X chosen for any of its costs, the value of X for that ability is the same as the value of X for that spell, although the value of X for
that permanent is 0. (...)
As I haven't reached a definitive conclusion, for now my judgment stands. Sorry for posting one more technical deep dive, but I think that this is the sort of problems that real Magic designers, and mostly editors probably, have to deal with whenever they print some new effect that has never been done before, which is, like, every set... It must not be an easy job. Each time I think about it and how they manage (or at least try) to keep the logical system of Magic working, my admiration for their work keeps on growing. Should I find any more evidence or change my mind about haywire's case, I will post it here.
Author of the MCC Guidelines and FAQ. | For my projects, including Jeff Lionheart, my murder mystery story "One pierced heart, two mindful horns", and republished articles from my series "The Lion's Lair", see Leo's content index (Last updated on March 24th 2024 - Added OPHTMH Episode 4).
After I'm done republishing my articles I want to reprise the series focusing it more on editing, wording, and templating. Suggest potential future article topics here.
My CCCG Resume (Updated on February 27th 2024)
Show
Hide
Blue = MTGSalvation Green = MTGNexus
MCC - Winner (9): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019, Jan Mar 2022, Apr 2023 || Host (30): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last on MTGS), Aug 2019 (first on MTGN) Oct 2019, Jan Jun 2020 Apr Oct 2021, Feb May Sep Dec 2022, Mar Jun Sep Dec 2023, Mar 2024 || Judge (58): every month from Nov 2014 to Nov 2016 except Oct 2015, every month from Feb to Jul 2017 except Apr 2017, then Oct 2017, May Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last on MTGS), every month from Aug 2019 (first on MTGN) to Feb 2020, May Jun 2020, Mar Apr Sep Oct 2021, Feb May Sep Dec 2022, Mar May Jun Sep Dec 2023, Jan Mar 2024
CCL - Winner (4): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last on MTGS), Jun 2021 (tied with slimytrout) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016
DCC - Winner (3): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar), Feb Apr 2022 || Host (12): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016, Jun Sep Dec 2021, Mar Jun Sep Dec 2022, Mar Jun 2023

User avatar
void_nothing
Look On My Sash...
Posts: 14924
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 124
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Tal Terig, Zendikar

Post by void_nothing » 1 year ago

bravelion83 wrote:
1 year ago
He's just right and I apologize. I'm giving him that half point back as soon as I'm finished writing this.
You mention it in the round thread, but this results in an impressive rarity. @slimytrout has a perfect MCC score!
Psst, check the second page of Custom Card Contests & Games! Because of the daily contests, a lot of games fall down to there.

The greatest (fake) pro wrestling on the internet - Collaborative Create-A-Booster - My random creations (updated regularly)

Important Facts: Colorless is not a color, Wastes is not a land type, Changeling is not a creature type

User avatar
Rithaniel
Posts: 2695
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Rithaniel » 1 year ago

haywire wrote:
1 year ago
It's not the rules that are Turing complete, it's the subset of cards, if you're referencing the paper from 2019. A small distinction but important
Yeah, I suppose you're right. It's not the rules themselves, but one of the systems those rules "create."
And a Few Quotes
Show
Hide
"Why are numbers beautiful? It's like asking why is Beethoven's Ninth Symphony beautiful. If you don't see why, someone can't tell you. I know numbers are beautiful. If they aren't beautiful, nothing is."
― Paul Erdős

“I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops.”
― Stephen Jay Gould

User avatar
Venedrex
Wait, we can have titles?
Posts: 1411
Joined: 3 years ago
Answers: 2
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Venedrex » 1 year ago

When you realize your passion for custom card making and the career path you chose might have more in common than you think... :o :grin:

What's funny is I went with software development mostly because it wasn't something that actively repulsed me (like having to cut people open as a surgeon) and it seemed like it would pay the bills in spite of inflation. Then a couple of days ago I tell my cousin what I chose and he says, that fits you. Now, people are discussing the similarities between MTG rules and programming. Perhaps it wasn't such a last resort after all.
Epicurean, EDH without Universes Beyond.

http://nxs.wf/np748831

haywire
Posts: 337
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by haywire » 1 year ago

bravelion83 wrote:
1 year ago
It turns out I was speaking to a person that fully knows about programming languages professionally without even knowing it. He could probably teach me about that.
Haha, I appreciate the compliment, but there's still a large gap between knowing something and being able to teach it.
bravelion83 wrote:
1 year ago
I noticed a thing that looks very interesting to me though. Throughout the whole rule 107.3, the one about X, when the rules mention "the value of X" being zero it's always written as a numeral. It's not a definitive rule but it's the closest thing I've been able to find.
That's definitely an interesting source. I would say that all of the examples shown there either directly associate X with an integer attribute like mana cost, or an indefinite value of X where the source providing X is entirely unknown, such as in in 103.7j. None of those examples specifically reference X in relation to "number word" attributes, but it at least establishes that the default for X is definitely an integer, and my interpretation would be a mutation on the system. I agree that it's not a definite conclusion, but there's definitely enough evidence to say that it is more likely to be the integer rather than the number word. Thanks for the discussion, and all the research you put into it.

User avatar
void_nothing
Look On My Sash...
Posts: 14924
Joined: 4 years ago
Answers: 124
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Tal Terig, Zendikar

Post by void_nothing » 1 year ago

@netn10
netn10 wrote:
1 year ago
Is the card fits the challenge?

Blood Canvas
Artifact (Rare)
As Blood Canvas enters the battlefield, pay any amount of life between 1 and 5.
: You gain X plus 2 life, where X is the life paid as Blood Canvas entered the battlefield.
No, it doesn't - the color identity has to be tricolor. This has a four color identity. (If those {G/W} symbols were {B/G} it'd pass.)
Psst, check the second page of Custom Card Contests & Games! Because of the daily contests, a lot of games fall down to there.

The greatest (fake) pro wrestling on the internet - Collaborative Create-A-Booster - My random creations (updated regularly)

Important Facts: Colorless is not a color, Wastes is not a land type, Changeling is not a creature type

haywire
Posts: 337
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by haywire » 1 year ago

For the purposes of MCC, is it allowable to assume a comprehensive rules update in a specific situation?
Specifically, if I want to put eternalize on a noncreature card, the Eternalize keyword ability currently reads as:
702.129. Eternalize
702.129a Eternalize is an activated ability that functions while the card with eternalize is in a graveyard. "Eternalize [cost]" means "[Cost], Exile this card from your graveyard: Create a token that's a copy of this card, except it's black, it's 4/4, it has no mana cost, and it's a Zombie in addition to its other types. Activate only as a sorcery."
Could I write that card, assuming 702.129a could be updated to:
702.129. Eternalize
702.129a Eternalize is an activated ability that functions while the card with eternalize is in a graveyard. "Eternalize [cost]" means "[Cost], Exile this card from your graveyard: Create a token that's a copy of this card, except it's black, it's 4/4, it has no mana cost, and it's a Zombie creature in addition to its other types. Activate only as a sorcery."
Or would that result in deductions?

User avatar
bravelion83
MKM MCC going on now
Posts: 4039
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Florence, Italy

Post by bravelion83 » 1 year ago

haywire wrote:
1 year ago
For the purposes of MCC, is it allowable to assume a comprehensive rules update in a specific situation?
Do you mean in general, on in a specific month?

If the latter, this is really just a question for the month's host (@Rithaniel for January).

In general, I feel I can speak as the author of the guidelines document. The guidelines say absolutely nothing about it, and I've just reread them all just to be sure and not just go based on my (sometimes faulty) memory. The overall spirit of the MCC, and that is indeed mentioned in the guidelines instead, is that of creating cards that are as close to real officially printed Magic cards as possible. In my opinion, requiring up-to-date wording, which is also something the guidelines do, implies that the rules we should use to create our cards to submit as players in this contest are those that are in force in that specific moment. For example, that would be the BRO edition of the CR right now, or in general the latest available version of the CR and other rules and policy documents (MTR, IPG, JAR) if applicable. The idea is that you design a custom card right now with the current set of rules, design tools, evergreen/non-evergreen keywords, etc... that are in place right here and now. This all kinda goes against the idea of assuming modifications to the CR, especially major ones. Maybe in theory one could hypothetically assume minor and evident ones (for example defining the term "unleashed" to be "if you chose to have this permanent enter the battlefield with a +1/+1 counter on it as you cast the spell that became this permanent" for your card to be able to say "if CARDNAME was unleashed, do something", just the first example that came to my mind scrolling rule 702 at random, 702.98 is unleash and right now, as of BRO, that term doesn't exist there), but I feel like you can't just assume a major CR change has to occur for your card to be able to work at all. Again, this is just my own opinion, the guidelines as they are don't mention this (I also think this question is an excellent one to add to the FAQ if and when the document is updated, at the very least to fix a few typos I've found during my rereading), but I think that I might be the person who best understands the intent behind them as I've written them myself. I will not talk about whether you're allowed or not to assume your specific proposed CR edit to eternalize for your card, as that's, again, a question for the month's host.

EDIT I can also see an argument about Viability asking about whether the card has rules issues implying that the rules under which the card has to work are the current ones, otherwise why even to ask if there are issues with the rules in the first place if you could just assume the rules would be changed appropriately to make the card work?
Author of the MCC Guidelines and FAQ. | For my projects, including Jeff Lionheart, my murder mystery story "One pierced heart, two mindful horns", and republished articles from my series "The Lion's Lair", see Leo's content index (Last updated on March 24th 2024 - Added OPHTMH Episode 4).
After I'm done republishing my articles I want to reprise the series focusing it more on editing, wording, and templating. Suggest potential future article topics here.
My CCCG Resume (Updated on February 27th 2024)
Show
Hide
Blue = MTGSalvation Green = MTGNexus
MCC - Winner (9): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019, Jan Mar 2022, Apr 2023 || Host (30): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last on MTGS), Aug 2019 (first on MTGN) Oct 2019, Jan Jun 2020 Apr Oct 2021, Feb May Sep Dec 2022, Mar Jun Sep Dec 2023, Mar 2024 || Judge (58): every month from Nov 2014 to Nov 2016 except Oct 2015, every month from Feb to Jul 2017 except Apr 2017, then Oct 2017, May Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last on MTGS), every month from Aug 2019 (first on MTGN) to Feb 2020, May Jun 2020, Mar Apr Sep Oct 2021, Feb May Sep Dec 2022, Mar May Jun Sep Dec 2023, Jan Mar 2024
CCL - Winner (4): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last on MTGS), Jun 2021 (tied with slimytrout) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016
DCC - Winner (3): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar), Feb Apr 2022 || Host (12): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016, Jun Sep Dec 2021, Mar Jun Sep Dec 2022, Mar Jun 2023

User avatar
Rithaniel
Posts: 2695
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Rithaniel » 1 year ago

If you mean to be asking me, I would say that this would fall in the category of "making a card that makes sense in the rules."

Like, you couldn't have a card that says something along the lines of "target creature gets +1/+/-1." Hypothetically you could change the comprehensive rules to make that line make sense, but, looking at it, without further context, I'd have to interpret it as a typo. However, further context could be provided, like reminder text that explains what "+1/+/-1" is supposed to be.

If the card doesn't provide context, it'd have to be taken as a mistake. If it does provide context, then you're asking the judges to evaluate something as a serialized mechanics, which could go either way.

If you are replacing an old version of a mechanic with a new one, then that's a bit more difficult to evaluate, but, when it comes down to it, I'd still treat it the same way as I would any "new" mechanic, and so you might as well sidestep the confusion by inventing a new keyword for it.
And a Few Quotes
Show
Hide
"Why are numbers beautiful? It's like asking why is Beethoven's Ninth Symphony beautiful. If you don't see why, someone can't tell you. I know numbers are beautiful. If they aren't beautiful, nothing is."
― Paul Erdős

“I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops.”
― Stephen Jay Gould

haywire
Posts: 337
Joined: 4 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by haywire » 1 year ago

@Rithaniel yes, I was trying to ask you for the purposes of the january mcc. Sorry, I should have @ed initially. I guess with my question I was more thingking along the lines that the intuitive way of reading eternalize, whose reminder text is "Exile this card from your graveyard: Create a token that's a copy of it, except it's a 4/4 black Zombie CREATURETYPE with no mana cost. Eternalize only as a sorcery." could be seen to imply it's a creature regardless of what it was initially, especially on a first read, and so it could reasonably fall into the same category as hideaway in SNC, where the functionality was updated to allow it to be more in-line with what people expected it to play as. I thought this might be able to support an argument that a rules change this minor/that effects no existing cards could be seen as allowable. Regardless, I think I've moved on from this idea regardless, but I appreciately both yours and @bravelion83 's answers.

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Contests & Games”