The MCC Discussion Thread

User avatar
void_nothing
The Chosen
Posts: 7275
Joined: 2 years ago
Answers: 68
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Snapgulch, Etrusa

Post by void_nothing » 1 year ago

It hasn't, and in fact, it won't without public discussion and then notification in this thread.

Don't expect that to happen often, if ever, full disclosure.
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

User avatar
Ryder
Posts: 212
Joined: 1 year ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Ryder » 1 year ago

Actually, I believe having an explicit list of DQ conditions would be most helpful. The document is very long (just finished reading) and that may be too much for newcomers.

One last thing. I think the guidelines about line breaks are prone to misinterpretation. I understand that there should be no needless line breaks. However, I do not understand how breaking a lengthy piece of rules text into separate lines (as in my entry, in which case it was preceded by thorough research) may be considered an error.

User avatar
bravelion83
Survivor. I've survived.
Posts: 2255
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Florence, Italy

Post by bravelion83 » 1 year ago

slimytrout wrote:
1 year ago
Ah, got it. Yes, I can easily do that -- as far as I know, it hasn't been changed since it was ported over from MTGS back in July.
In fact. No changes have been made to the MCC rules in years. What I've done in the guidelines document is to collect them all in a single place and give them a proper organized structure. But the only change to the rules in recent years is the revamping of the rubric in 2015, made by me and another user. All the other rules have been there since even before, at the very least since I was involved personally in the custom card contest community (since 2010 sporadically and since 2014 regularly). A submission post that has been edited after the deadline would have been DQ'ed since 2014 at the very least, probably even before. And that's exactly what I have to do in this case, very regretfully.
Ryder wrote:
1 year ago
Actually, I believe having an explicit list of DQ conditions would be most helpful. The document is very long (just finished reading) and that may be too much for newcomers.
The spirit of the document is essentially the same as the CR in real Magic. The CR aren't meant to be read start to finish, but just referred to in specific points when needed. The same is true for the guidelines document. While I invite everybody to read it fully if they have the will and time, it's not necessarily meant to. Making an example is very simple: do you want to see an explicit list of all the possible causes of DQ? It's already there, and it's always been, just go to the index, see that "Disqualifications" is section 7, go directly to that section, and you'll find it! If you're helping out a newcomer that has a doubt about that, just point them directly to section 7 in this case, or the proper section for their doubt in general. No need for them to immediately read the full document. If they want, they will do that later, at their own pace and with their own times.
However, I do not understand how breaking a lengthy piece of rules text into separate lines (as in my entry, in which case it was preceded by thorough research) may be considered an error.
"Error" might actually be the wrong word. "Non-standard templating" might be better. Anyway, still relevant in the Quality section and deserving of a deduction. We could argue about how little or how big of a deduction, but I don't think this is the right time and place for that.
void_nothing wrote:
1 year ago
It hasn't, and in fact, it won't without public discussion and then notification in this thread.

Don't expect that to happen often, if ever, full disclosure.
I also confirm that no changes will be made without an in-depth discussion right here in this thread, followed by an explicit notification, also in this thread, and by at the very least one month of testing. I don't anticipate any big changes coming in the foreseeable future. An update to fix typos and such, but without changing the meaning of a single sentence, might come eventually, but again, not in the near future. And even then, when the time for that will come, that will also be preceded by discussion and notification right in this thread.
My CCCG Resume (Updated on September 28th 2021)
Show
Blue means it was on MTGSalvation. Green means it was here on MTGNexus.
MCC - Winner (6): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019 || Host (21): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last ever on MTGSalvation), Aug 2019 (first ever on MTGNexus) Oct 2019, Jan Jun 2020 Apr Oct 2021 || Judge (47): 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 ever on MTGSalvation), every month from Aug 2019 (first ever on MTGNexus) to Feb 2020, May Jun 2020, Mar Apr Sep Oct 2021
CCL - Winner (4): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last ever on MTGSalvation), Jun 2021 (tied with slimytrout) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016
DCC - Winner (1): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar) || Host (5): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016, Jun Sep 2021
My projects (Updated on June 14th 2019)
Show
All on MTGSalvation for now. See this Blogger post.
Author of the MCC Guidelines and FAQ.


User avatar
bravelion83
Survivor. I've survived.
Posts: 2255
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Florence, Italy

Post by bravelion83 » 1 year ago

And I will have finished my own bracket too in a few minutes. Then I'll take a break (I need it after fully judging six cards in a row) and judge Ryder's card out of competition tomorrow.

EDIT: I've found a bunch of typos in my judgments, now they should have all been fixed.
Last edited by bravelion83 1 year ago, edited 1 time in total.
My CCCG Resume (Updated on September 28th 2021)
Show
Blue means it was on MTGSalvation. Green means it was here on MTGNexus.
MCC - Winner (6): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019 || Host (21): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last ever on MTGSalvation), Aug 2019 (first ever on MTGNexus) Oct 2019, Jan Jun 2020 Apr Oct 2021 || Judge (47): 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 ever on MTGSalvation), every month from Aug 2019 (first ever on MTGNexus) to Feb 2020, May Jun 2020, Mar Apr Sep Oct 2021
CCL - Winner (4): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last ever on MTGSalvation), Jun 2021 (tied with slimytrout) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016
DCC - Winner (1): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar) || Host (5): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016, Jun Sep 2021
My projects (Updated on June 14th 2019)
Show
All on MTGSalvation for now. See this Blogger post.
Author of the MCC Guidelines and FAQ.


slimytrout
Posts: 1192
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by slimytrout » 1 year ago

Wow, this is great! All the judgements are in, more than 36 hours ahead of schedule! And this is Round 1, where we have the most submissions to grade -- I hope everyone else is as impressed with my fellow judges as I am.

Anyway, I'm going to wait until this evening to allow time for people to lodge complaints about the judgements (if they feel very strongly about them -- obviously don't do it just for the hell of it), but if no one has any objections I'm going to plan to post Round 2 this evening, since we might as well keep things moving.
Last edited by slimytrout 1 year ago, edited 1 time in total.

Ink-Treader
Posts: 488
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by Ink-Treader » 1 year ago

It doesn't change anything meaningfully, but I want to point out that the provided link for keyword abilities does include enchant.

slimytrout
Posts: 1192
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by slimytrout » 1 year ago

Oh wow, that's on me. I'm so used to skipping over that piece of text ("enchant whatever") that I totally missed that. Will edit my judgement.

slimytrout
Posts: 1192
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by slimytrout » 1 year ago

Hearing no more objections, I've posted Round 2. Enjoy!

User avatar
bravelion83
Survivor. I've survived.
Posts: 2255
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Florence, Italy

Post by bravelion83 » 1 year ago

slimytrout wrote:
1 year ago
Wow, this is great! All the judgements are in, more than 36 hours ahead of schedule! And this is Round 1, where we have the most submissions to grade -- I hope everyone else is as impressed with my fellow judges as I am.
I am, and I've been for all last month. I know how good it feels as a host to have all judgments in on time, but I warn you: don't get too used to it! And never give it for granted. And I'm talking from experience...

About Round 2, as being a "hand matters" set (by the way, Kamigawa came close with its "hand size matters" theme) is part of the Main Challenge, everybody please be aware that I will judge the Main Challenge section in the same way I did in Round 1, only changing "graveyard matters" to "hand matters". Essentially, I'll divide the points. 1 point for "is the word 'hand' there?" and 1 point for "how does this card fit in a 'hand matters' set?" You've been warned! :)

And finally, I'm about to judge Ryder's card from Round 1 out of competition. I'm sorry, I thought I would have done it before this moment, but real life gets in the way, as it always does...
My CCCG Resume (Updated on September 28th 2021)
Show
Blue means it was on MTGSalvation. Green means it was here on MTGNexus.
MCC - Winner (6): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019 || Host (21): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last ever on MTGSalvation), Aug 2019 (first ever on MTGNexus) Oct 2019, Jan Jun 2020 Apr Oct 2021 || Judge (47): 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 ever on MTGSalvation), every month from Aug 2019 (first ever on MTGNexus) to Feb 2020, May Jun 2020, Mar Apr Sep Oct 2021
CCL - Winner (4): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last ever on MTGSalvation), Jun 2021 (tied with slimytrout) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016
DCC - Winner (1): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar) || Host (5): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016, Jun Sep 2021
My projects (Updated on June 14th 2019)
Show
All on MTGSalvation for now. See this Blogger post.
Author of the MCC Guidelines and FAQ.

User avatar
barbecube
Posts: 107
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: London

Post by barbecube » 1 year ago

Hey [mention]bravelion83[/mention], Ghoulraiser
formerly willows

User avatar
bravelion83
Survivor. I've survived.
Posts: 2255
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Florence, Italy

Post by bravelion83 » 1 year ago

One thing at a time. I've just finished writing my judgment for Ryder's card out of competition (look at the very bottom of that post). You should probably check it out if you like the Simpsons or Magic-related life stories.

[mention]barbecube[/mention]: I don't understand what you're telling me. Have I written something wrong in one of my judgments that Ghoulraiser proves wrong? It might very well be, I'm far from perfect. Anyway, I still have the Round 1 thread open in another tab from posting Ryder's judgment, I'll check to see if I understand what you're referring to.

Edit: if you're referring to my "personal aside" and the fact that I've said that I just don't play with cards that say "at random" or coin flips and such, that was just me being too talkative as usual, I didn't consider that in the score. Really, this would be much easier if you just told me what you're referring to specifically.

Edit 2: Oh, maybe I've got it. Are you talking about the fact that Ghoulraiser doesn't include the "reorder your graveyard" part? If so, I will have to dig a little deeper. I'll get back to you again very soon.

Edit 3: I was hoping Ghoulraiser had some specific rulings, but it doesn't have any. Let me dig even deeper, in the big ocean known as Comprehensive Rules...

Edit 4: The closest thing I've found in the CR is rule 705.3 allowing you to use a different method of randomization for cards that involve coin flips, bringing as an example rolling an even-sided die. And in my judgment, I have mentioned that you could roll a die to choose the random target, I've just said that I think that's not what most players, especially casual ones (that, let's always remember it, are actually the majority despite how much we enfranchised players would like the opposite to be true) would do. I think they're more likely to choose the random target in a way that's actually forbidden in older formats. Really, I just don't understand what you're referring to. I've reread my judgment of your card, and I still don't understand. Could you be a little more specific please?
Last edited by bravelion83 1 year ago, edited 2 times in total.
My CCCG Resume (Updated on September 28th 2021)
Show
Blue means it was on MTGSalvation. Green means it was here on MTGNexus.
MCC - Winner (6): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019 || Host (21): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last ever on MTGSalvation), Aug 2019 (first ever on MTGNexus) Oct 2019, Jan Jun 2020 Apr Oct 2021 || Judge (47): 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 ever on MTGSalvation), every month from Aug 2019 (first ever on MTGNexus) to Feb 2020, May Jun 2020, Mar Apr Sep Oct 2021
CCL - Winner (4): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last ever on MTGSalvation), Jun 2021 (tied with slimytrout) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016
DCC - Winner (1): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar) || Host (5): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016, Jun Sep 2021
My projects (Updated on June 14th 2019)
Show
All on MTGSalvation for now. See this Blogger post.
Author of the MCC Guidelines and FAQ.

User avatar
barbecube
Posts: 107
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: London

Post by barbecube » 1 year ago

Yeah, I'm talking about edit 2. Ghoulraiser is the more recent wording precedent for such effects.
formerly willows

User avatar
bravelion83
Survivor. I've survived.
Posts: 2255
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Florence, Italy

Post by bravelion83 » 1 year ago

Sorry, I hadn't realized you had posted in the meantime. So you're talking about wording. So, Quality. That's where you talk about wording. I've actually given you full points there. My comment was about pointing out that you used the correct wording indeed, even if I was actually referring to the reflexive trigger thing there.
bravelion83 wrote:
1 year ago
If instead of "a card at random" you had said "return target card", it's then that you would have needed a reflexive trigger.
Here I'm not saying you should have said "return target card". I was just saying that if you had used that wording instead of the one you went for (that's perfectly fine), then it would have needed a reflexive trigger. But your card uses another wording, so it's fine as it is on that regard.

If instead you refer to the fact that it's possible to "return a random card from graveyard to hand", then I've never said it isn't possible.

Or maybe the answer you're looking for was in the last edit (edit 4):
bravelion83 wrote:
1 year ago
And in my judgment, I have mentioned that you could roll a die to choose the random target, I've just said that I think that's not what most players, especially casual ones (that, let's always remember it, are actually the majority despite how much we enfranchised players would like the opposite to be true) would do.
bravelion83 wrote:
1 year ago
You would have to come up with something different. Maybe rolling a die?
And then I go on to explain that rolling a die has some problems too. You can do it, but it's not a problem-free solution. That would just be adding the "reorder" part in my opinion. And by the way, I'd probably say very similar things about Ghoulraiser too. I'm not saying you can't use the wording you've used, just that I think there is a better one.
My CCCG Resume (Updated on September 28th 2021)
Show
Blue means it was on MTGSalvation. Green means it was here on MTGNexus.
MCC - Winner (6): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019 || Host (21): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last ever on MTGSalvation), Aug 2019 (first ever on MTGNexus) Oct 2019, Jan Jun 2020 Apr Oct 2021 || Judge (47): 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 ever on MTGSalvation), every month from Aug 2019 (first ever on MTGNexus) to Feb 2020, May Jun 2020, Mar Apr Sep Oct 2021
CCL - Winner (4): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last ever on MTGSalvation), Jun 2021 (tied with slimytrout) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016
DCC - Winner (1): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar) || Host (5): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016, Jun Sep 2021
My projects (Updated on June 14th 2019)
Show
All on MTGSalvation for now. See this Blogger post.
Author of the MCC Guidelines and FAQ.

User avatar
Sojourner Dusk
Dominarian Hitchhiker
Posts: 189
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted
Location: Blind Eternities

Post by Sojourner Dusk » 1 year ago

This is constructive criticism for future judging, and is in no way meant to change the scores from Round 1.

Icarii's card: "Gore-Breather Vampire can't be blocked by players with 10 or less life." needs to be changed. Players do not block creatures. To have this work, the card should read "Gore-Breather Vampire can't be blocked as long as defending player has 10 or less life." Hooded Horror uses the errata'd text that would be employed for this effect. There are only nine cards that use it, but "as long as defending player" is a phrase that exists on Magic cards (in errata, of course, as 'unblockable' is no longer used).

kypster's card: "When Adopted Egg enters the battlefield, look at the top five cards of your library, exile one face down, then put the rest on the bottom of your library." How are the cards arranged: in a random order, or in any order? While minor, this can make a difference.

Subject16's card: The line "When Nyxmantle Phoenix dies, return __ __ its owner's hand." is missing two needed words at the underscores: "It to".
May your games be chaotic and your decks be rogue.



UBR Nekusar (EDH)
RGW Mayael, Naturally (EDH)

slimytrout
Posts: 1192
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by slimytrout » 1 year ago

We appreciate the constructive criticism (or at least I do for the mistake that I missed), but in the future please relay this type of feedback via pm. Even though these are quality issues, and are therefore in theory objective, it's really better if the judges are the only ones making corrections to the submissions. I totally understand the temptation, as I've felt it more than once myself, and your message was worded very nicely, but if it becomes a normal thing to do then there's a real possibility that this discussion thread just becomes a place to take shots at other people's cards.

User avatar
Icarii
Posts: 84
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him

Post by Icarii » 1 year ago

Icarii's card: "Gore-Breather Vampire can't be blocked by players with 10 or less life." needs to be changed. Players do not block creatures. To have this work, the card should read "Gore-Breather Vampire can't be blocked as long as defending player has 10 or less life." Hooded Horror uses the errata'd text that would be employed for this effect. There are only nine cards that use it, but "as long as defending player" is a phrase that exists on Magic cards (in errata, of course, as 'unblockable' is no longer used).
You may be right. I didn't do heavy research into the possible wordings on that line and off the top of my head justified it with True-Name Nemesis as an example of the idea (Protection from a player including creatures they control made my jump to a similarly justified wording here.) It made the text shorter and simpler while still conveying the idea. Though perhaps like True-Name Nemesis it would need reminded text explaining that wording. This is the part of card design that least appeals to me, because the nuance of perfect text is not my goal. Ideas are. So i'm used to quality deductions haha.

Also, I agree you should reserve these kinda of comments to a PM. While in my case a change in the quality score of my card wouldn't have made a difference in advancement, in other instances they have the potential to unnecessarily rile people where it could of changed the outcome.
You've always been one of the best designers around here to play outside the box. We really compensate each other in that. I feel like we're the two extremes on the scale of "how willing you are in taking risks in custom card design". If 0 is no risk, and 10 maximum risk, then I'm totally a 0 and you're one of the closer ones to a 10 that I can think about. And don't misunderstand me, this is meant to be a compliment, and a big one. As I've said multiple times by now, this is a skill I have to learn, in real life too. And I keep envying you because you always show it in the boldness of your designs.
I do appreciate you going out and saying this! I've felt very similarly from the other side of the aisle. You have a talent for taking the tools and design space the game has defined well and re-combining it flavorful, mechanically strong ways. This is a valuable skill.

I tend to push for card ideas and effects that feel unique, perhaps requiring new wordings or concepts to make them work. This is also a valuable skill, and something that I think is more important in a design contest than elsewhere.

Anyone with a decent amount of experience can design safe, well balanced cards that if you took the name/flavor text off of them would look near indistinguishable from dozens of others. Its being able to recombine what we know in fresh ways or poking at new space entirely that shows ones potential as a designer. We tend to favor different ends of the spectrum, and showcase them well. :grin:

User avatar
bravelion83
Survivor. I've survived.
Posts: 2255
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Florence, Italy

Post by bravelion83 » 1 year ago

Ok, another round of replies. Let's go!

First, the one that I feel is by far the most important one:
slimytrout wrote:
1 year ago
... in the future please relay this type of feedback via pm. ... it's really better if the judges are the only ones making corrections to the submissions. ... if it becomes a normal thing to do then there's a real possibility that this discussion thread just becomes a place to take shots at other people's cards.
And it cannot and should not. I totally agree with this. In fact, I agree so much that it's already in the FAQ (see the FAQ section of the "MTGNexus MCC Guidelines and FAQ" document, that I wrote, link always in my signature and in most, if not all, round thread OPs.) In page 20, the penultimate page, the fourth question from the top is (emphasis by underlining is mine... well, as well as the rest of the document):
Okay, maybe my card wasn't the best, but my opponent's card was horrific and it beat mine! Can I challenge the score of my opponent's card?
No. Again, you can send a polite and civil pm to the judge, but don't expect anything to change. In this case specifically, please contact the judge via pm and NOT in the discussion thread. Discussing an opponent's card is, on the surface, just as valid as discussing your own, but the potential bad feelings just aren't worth it.
Now, this isn't the case of a player challenging other players' scores, but I feel like the same philosophy applies, especially the underlined part. Speaking only as the author of the guidelines, and also note that I'm telling this to everybody and not anyone specifically, for the future please keep that kind of messages to pms and try not to post them here or, even worse, in the round threads. Really, it's best for everybody.



Ok, next. The one point of Sojourner Dusk's post that involves myself personally as the judge, about Icarii's card, that was in my own bracket.
Sojourner Dusk wrote:
1 year ago
... needs to be changed. Players do not block creatures.
I have already said this in my own judgment! Again, underlining for emphasis here:
bravelion83 wrote:
1 year ago
Quality 3/3 - ... I obviously can't find any precedents for the "blocked by players" wordings, also because technically it's not players who block, but it's the "defending player(s)" who declare "blocking creatures".
I also had already proposed a different wording:
I'm convinced that this should say "...can't be blocked by creatures controlled by players with 10 or less life", but I have no real basis to back this with, so I'll just mention this without deducting any points.
Sojourner Dusk wrote:
1 year ago
To have this work, the card should read "Gore-Breather Vampire can't be blocked as long as defending player has 10 or less life." Hooded Horror uses the errata'd text that would be employed for this effect.
Ok, yes, that's the correct wording that somehow I've missed. Even if I had thought of it and made a -0.5 deduction, it would bring Icarii's score to 23.5 instead of 24, not changing anything, neither the fact that he advances nor the fact that he's in first place in my bracket. Also, now the judging deadline has passed so I can't edit my judgment post to include this now anyway. In my bracket, things will stay as they are. And you also said yourself you weren't asking for any score changing (which would be impossible anyway now). Thank you, Sojourner Dusk, for doing what I couldn't for some reason, that's finding the correct wording.
Sojourner Dusk wrote:
1 year ago
There are only nine cards that use it
I can only find eight, one of which is an un-card (Bursting Beebles). Of course, what I checked is the Oracle text, as I always do. Those eight cards that I've found are the following: As a Quality expert, or better, a person with an eye for details, I absolutely confirm that you're totally right in the other two points you raise, even though I will not say anything more about them as I wasn't the judge for those cards, except for the fact that in both of those cases too the results wouldn't change anyway. Again, I'm just talking in general, as you had already said yourself you weren't trying to have the scores changed.



Next. Icarii.
Icarii wrote:
1 year ago
You may be right.
I was the judge for your card, so I think I can say this explicitly: he is totally right.
Icarii wrote:
1 year ago
like True-Name Nemesis it would need reminded text explaining that wording
It would absolutely need it, so the final text might end up even longer than the technically correct one that Sojourner Dusk pointed out and I also mentioned slightly above in this very post.
Icarii wrote:
1 year ago
This is the part of card design that least appeals to me, because the nuance of perfect text is not my goal. Ideas are.
It's the exact contrary for me. Here's the cause of our differences as custom card designers that you noticed yourself. Editing has a very high appeal to me, design too, but I've said in multiple occasions that if I were working in R&D for real I would probably want to be an editor, not a designer. Or better, an editor still dabbling his head here and there in card design, and that would like to be part of some design teams as well, but still keeping editing as my primary job. But talking about this is totally useless, as my actual work is another one (when I do) and I couldn't work at WotC anyway as I don't live in the USA.
Icarii wrote:
1 year ago
Also, I agree you should reserve these kinda of comments to a PM. While in my case a change in the quality score of my card wouldn't have made a difference in advancement, in other instances they have the potential to unnecessarily rile people where it could of changed the outcome.
Here's another person that agrees. Really, these things should just be handled via pms. And again, it's already there in the guidelines and FAQ!
Icarii wrote:
1 year ago
I do appreciate you going out and saying this!
It's both what I actually think and just the truth. I will always say either or both of those.
I've felt very similarly from the other side of the aisle.
Which only confirms to me that my thought is totally right.
You have a talent for taking the tools and design space the game has defined well and re-combining it flavorful, mechanically strong ways. This is a valuable skill.
Thank you. A lot, and from the heart. With a single sentence you totally returned the "huge compliments" I was making you in my judgment. And yes, I'm totally aware that this is my strength as a custom card designer.
I tend to push for card ideas and effects that feel unique, perhaps requiring new wordings or concepts to make them work.
Which has a tendency to make your cards very hard to judge. I can assure you as an experienced judge myself, yours are the cards I often have the most trouble judging, especially in Quality but everywhere really. And the main reason is exactly this: there is rarely any precedent for most of your cards. If Quality is what I feel is my strongest area, yours must be Uniqueness! And it's definitely not by chance that you've been the one to push for its inclusion in the rubric when we revamped it in 2015. I think I can say this publicly, I've even written it in the history of the rubric that you can find in my guidelines document.
This is also a valuable skill
Absolutely. I feel like we would fit very well together in a real R&D design team. We bring different skills to the table, but that are both needed. And we'd essentially balance each other. Figuratively, I'd try to push your break pedal and you'd try to push my gas one. I think the final results could be really very intesting in a real set.
and something that I think is more important in a design contest than elsewhere.
As I've also said, I think this is exactly the reason I tend to have a hard time winning in the CCL once I get to the finals, and an even harder time winning the DCC (only happened once, and tied). It's also not by chance that the one contest where I feel at home is the MCC. But this is perfectly normal. I and you are different people, and each of us is different from everybody else in the planet. Isn't this diversity exactly what makes each single human being and also humanity in general interesting? I do think so.
...being able to recombine what we know in fresh ways
This is me.
or poking at new space entirely...
And this is you. See how complementary we are?
We tend to favor different ends of the spectrum, and showcase them well.
I totally agree, but I don't think it's that we "favor" different ends. I don't think it's a rational thing. It's just that our natural inclinations are different. Overall, thank you very much for your words. And I really like that our appreciation is reciprocal, and how we recognize each other's strengths. I wish everybody behaved this way... both on the internet and in real life. Thanks again.

And I think this is the end. Sorry for the length, but I felt I had to answer these. By now I think that my loquacity is legendary, or at least very well-known. And I'm amazed if I think that I was the exact opposite as a child!
My CCCG Resume (Updated on September 28th 2021)
Show
Blue means it was on MTGSalvation. Green means it was here on MTGNexus.
MCC - Winner (6): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019 || Host (21): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last ever on MTGSalvation), Aug 2019 (first ever on MTGNexus) Oct 2019, Jan Jun 2020 Apr Oct 2021 || Judge (47): 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 ever on MTGSalvation), every month from Aug 2019 (first ever on MTGNexus) to Feb 2020, May Jun 2020, Mar Apr Sep Oct 2021
CCL - Winner (4): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last ever on MTGSalvation), Jun 2021 (tied with slimytrout) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016
DCC - Winner (1): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar) || Host (5): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016, Jun Sep 2021
My projects (Updated on June 14th 2019)
Show
All on MTGSalvation for now. See this Blogger post.
Author of the MCC Guidelines and FAQ.

User avatar
Sojourner Dusk
Dominarian Hitchhiker
Posts: 189
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted
Location: Blind Eternities

Post by Sojourner Dusk » 1 year ago

The reason I did not PM the Judges/Players with the comments was to illustrate how some things can be overlooked, both during design, as well as during review. WotC has let typos slip through and forgotten that an Artifact Creature should have both types showing when printed. These are the kind of mistakes everyone makes, and I wanted to point them out, not only for future Judges, but also future Players, so we all improve our Design skills. That said, moving forward, I will refrain from future comments in this Thread. Sidebar: am I the only one that misses Moss Elemental's judgments?

On Icarii's card, determining what would be better phrasing is difficult if you don't already have a point of reference to look for. BTW, the ninth card errata'd to have the phrase "as long as defending player" is Arctic Foxes. I don't know why it comes up in Scryfall but not Gatherer. EDIT: It does narrow down to nine in Gatherer, including Arctic Foxes, if you include "NOT walk" in the search to filter out all the cards with landwalk reminder text.

kypster and Subject16's submissions had omissions that may have been overlooked because our brains fill in what's missing when we read too quickly. I've done it more than once. There's a term for the process, but it eludes me at the moment.

I'll go back into my self-imposed Judging exile now.
Last edited by Sojourner Dusk 1 year ago, edited 1 time in total.
May your games be chaotic and your decks be rogue.



UBR Nekusar (EDH)
RGW Mayael, Naturally (EDH)

User avatar
bravelion83
Survivor. I've survived.
Posts: 2255
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Florence, Italy

Post by bravelion83 » 1 year ago

Sojourner Dusk wrote:
1 year ago
the ninth card errata'd to have the phrase "as long as defending player" is Arctic Foxes. I don't know why it comes up in Scryfall but not Gatherer.
Thank you. I think it's because its Oracle text, copied from Gatherer, is: "Arctic Foxes can't be blocked by creatures with power 2 or greater as long as defending player controls a snow land." I think that something being in between "can't be blocked" and "as long as defending player..." is what caused me not to find it.
...omissions that may have been overlooked because our brains fill in what's missing when we read too quickly. ... There's a term for the process, but it eludes me at the moment.
Yes, I've heard it too, and I also remember there is a proper term for that but it also eludes me now!
My CCCG Resume (Updated on September 28th 2021)
Show
Blue means it was on MTGSalvation. Green means it was here on MTGNexus.
MCC - Winner (6): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019 || Host (21): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last ever on MTGSalvation), Aug 2019 (first ever on MTGNexus) Oct 2019, Jan Jun 2020 Apr Oct 2021 || Judge (47): 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 ever on MTGSalvation), every month from Aug 2019 (first ever on MTGNexus) to Feb 2020, May Jun 2020, Mar Apr Sep Oct 2021
CCL - Winner (4): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last ever on MTGSalvation), Jun 2021 (tied with slimytrout) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016
DCC - Winner (1): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar) || Host (5): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016, Jun Sep 2021
My projects (Updated on June 14th 2019)
Show
All on MTGSalvation for now. See this Blogger post.
Author of the MCC Guidelines and FAQ.

slimytrout
Posts: 1192
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by slimytrout » 1 year ago

Reminder that the design deadline for round 2 is only 6 hours away! We're still missing multiple submissions -- if you need an extension please ask, rather than just submitting late.

slimytrout
Posts: 1192
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: Unlisted

Post by slimytrout » 1 year ago

Flatline wrote:
1 year ago
I apologize for having submitted two cards. I've had a busy couple of days. I meant to delete the first, unfinished card. I don't want to edit my post after the deadline, but if no one objects, can "Haunting Reminder" be considered my entry? I understand if I'm just DQ'ed though.

Edit: I probably should have posted this in the discussion thread. Sorry.
After some discussion, we've decided to consider only the finished entry for this submission and disregard the unfinished one. We want to encourage people to come forward with problems like these rather than trying to sneakily edit their entry without permission, and in cases like this where it was a clear mistake, it just makes the contest more fun if everyone gets to participate. So bravelion will be judging the entry as if it didn't have the unfinished submission.

User avatar
bravelion83
Survivor. I've survived.
Posts: 2255
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Florence, Italy

Post by bravelion83 » 1 year ago

slimytrout wrote:
1 year ago
After some discussion, we've decided to consider only the finished entry for this submission and disregard the unfinished one. We want to encourage people to come forward with problems like these rather than trying to sneakily edit their entry without permission, and in cases like this where it was a clear mistake, it just makes the contest more fun if everyone gets to participate. So bravelion will be judging the entry as if it didn't have the unfinished submission.
As the involved judge, I confirm everything. Just so it's clear for everybody, in the context of the quoted message "we" means "slimytrout (as host) and bravelion83 (as the involved judge)".

And I will, in fact, judge only Haunting Reminder as the official entry. And after clearing this, I can actually start my judgment. Heading to the round thread right now.
My CCCG Resume (Updated on September 28th 2021)
Show
Blue means it was on MTGSalvation. Green means it was here on MTGNexus.
MCC - Winner (6): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019 || Host (21): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last ever on MTGSalvation), Aug 2019 (first ever on MTGNexus) Oct 2019, Jan Jun 2020 Apr Oct 2021 || Judge (47): 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 ever on MTGSalvation), every month from Aug 2019 (first ever on MTGNexus) to Feb 2020, May Jun 2020, Mar Apr Sep Oct 2021
CCL - Winner (4): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last ever on MTGSalvation), Jun 2021 (tied with slimytrout) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016
DCC - Winner (1): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar) || Host (5): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016, Jun Sep 2021
My projects (Updated on June 14th 2019)
Show
All on MTGSalvation for now. See this Blogger post.
Author of the MCC Guidelines and FAQ.

User avatar
Flatline
The Heartbeat of America
Posts: 444
Joined: 2 years ago
Pronoun: he / him
Location: Someplace Special

Post by Flatline » 1 year ago

[mention]slimytrout[/mention] , [mention]bravelion83[/mention] Thanks for understanding. I apologize for the confusion and delay (Sir Topham Hatt would be most displeased). I really like my unfinished card, and I was hoping to come up with some way to take the blue out of it so it would pass the first sub-challenge. Unfortunately, a personal issue arose that consumed most of my time the last couple of days, so not only didn't I have time to come up with a way to remove the blue ('cause I think the card actually has to be blue), but I didn't even have time to delete one of the entries from my post.
Card Contest Victories
Show
DCC
Show
(25 Total) - October 2014; December 2014; January 2015; April 2015; June 2015; August 2015; September 2015; November 2015; December 2015(T); January 2016; March 2016(T); April 2016; June 2016; October 2016; December 2016(T); February 2017; April 2017; December 2017; November 2018(T); January 2019; April 2019; June 2019; August 2019; October 2019; March 2020
MCC
Show
(8 Total) - May 2015; May 2016; June 2016; August 2016; October 2016; December 2016; October 2017; May 2019
CCL
Show
(7 Total) - September 2015; October 2015; January 2016; March 2016; April 2016; July 2016(T); March 2019(T)

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Contests & Games”