The DCC Discussion Thread

[void_nothing]

Very strong that the tokens created also trigger the ability including itself. the only answer to this card is to exile it?

Well, no, they don't. Tokens aren't cards, meaning that the answer is to remove the original and then the token.

[archemediesx]

Very strong that the tokens created also trigger the ability including itself. the only answer to this card is to exile it?

Well, no, they don't. Tokens aren't cards, meaning that the answer is to remove the original and then the token.

That's my mistake as I misread the trigger. I don't know why those 'from anywhere' triggers always break my brain, but they do. Props for the Terisiare era reference.

bravelion83, Caspernicus

Guardian Wisp 2WW
Creature - Spirit (U)
Flying
When ~ enters the battlefield, exile target nonland permanent an opponent controls until ~ leaves the battlfield.
If a permanent with mana value 2 or less is exiled with ~, it has ward 2.
2/2

I like this card and it would absolutely make my cube. the isolated 'if' statement would need to be a part of the previous trigger to be true, or would need to be turned into an 'as long as' if detached. I.E.

When ~ enters the battlefield, exile target nonland permanent an opponent controls until ~ leaves the battlefield. If a permanent with mana value 2 or less is exiled this way, ~ gains ward 2.

When ~ enters the battlefield, exile target nonland permanent an opponent controls until ~ leaves the battlefield.
~has ward 2 as long as it exiled a permanent with mana value 2 or less.

[void_nothing]

@Rithaniel I got my entry yesterday in before today's thread was posted but it looks like I was missed!

[Rithaniel]

@Rithaniel I got my entry yesterday in before today's thread was posted but it looks like I was missed!

Whoops, and I fell asleep immediately after posting the thread. Apologies.

[bravelion83]

Votes: RattingRots, Caspernicus

False Lead U
Artifact - Clue (Common)
Disguise 2
When False Lead dies, if it was face-down, draw two cards.
2, Sacrifice False Lead: Draw a card.

netn10

Show

Hide

When False Lead dies, if it was face-down, draw two cards.

This ability doesn't work as probably intended. Currently, "dies" is only for creatures and planeswalkers, even if I agree with you that it should be used with any permanent. But that's not the problem. What doesn't make this work is the fact that a leaves-the-battlefield triggered ability, such as a death trigger like this, looks back in time to determine whether it should trigger, and when it looks back in time it sees a face-down creature with no abilities, including this one, so it doesn't see the ability being there on the face-doen permanent as it last was on the battlefield, so it doesn't trigger at all, regardless of the intervening if clause. To have this ability work as intended you need something that doesn't look back in time, like "from anywhere". If you write it like this:

When False Lead is put into your graveyard from anywhere, if it was face-down, draw two cards.

then it can trigger (depending on whether the intervening if is true or not), because "from anywhere" specifically doesn't look back in time despite still being a leaves-the-battlefield triggered ability. It's not functionally identical (for example it would theoretically count milling as well, which the original wording doesn't) but it's the closest I can think of to a triggered ability that can work as clearly intended here. By the way, the intervening if is checking for "face down", which is a status of a permanent, and permanents exists only on the battlefield, so the intervening if is only true, allowing the ability to trigger, if it's put from the battlefield to the graveyard, not from any other zone, where the status is nonexisting and thus undefined, so the intervening if is false in that case and the ability doesn't trigger anyway. Essentially, "from anywhere", which is necessary for the ability to not look back in time and not even trigger, is not really from anywhere, but only from the battlefield, and the intervening if takes care of excluding all other possible cases. So milling would NOT actually work, and that's why I said "theoretically" above, nor would anything else but the permanent dying, as intended. You need to say "from anywhere" and let the intervening if exclude the unwanted cases. It wouldn't be intuitive at all, because "from anywhere" is not actually from anywhere, only from the battlefield, and most players wouldn't understand why it needs to say "from anywhere" to work. I think this is why they haven't done something like this yet in real Magic.

@bravelion83 : Thanks for the extensive explanation. I do wonder how this could be neatly worded.

You need something that doesn't look back in time to detemine whether it triggers but that also checks the permanent as it was on the battlefield, possibly using last-known information. I just thought about a variation of my proposed wording:

When False Lead is put into your graveyard from anywhere, if it was a face-down permanent, draw two cards.

I've added the word "permanent" to the intervening if, so that the intervening if only checks permanents that were on the battlefield and not cards from other zones. Essentially, "from anywhere" is there and needed to prevent the ability from looking back in time and having it actually trigger from the graveyard (not 100% correct terminology, I know, just using it for clarity), but you don't want this to actually trigger from anywhere, but only if it was face-down on the battlefield. And what's the unique word for an object on the battlefield? A "permanent". Adding that word to the intervening if makes it only work if the face-down False Lead was actually on the battlefield, otherwise the intervening if will be false, preventing the ability to trigger at all. In short, "from anywhere" is there for the ability not to look back in time while the word "permanent" in the intervening if makes it so that it only triggers from a face-down False Lead that was actually face-down on the battlefield (otherwise it wouldn't be a "permanent" but a "permanent card" or a "permanent spell"), which I think was your original intent. I believe that this wording makes the functionality be exactly what you want, it's just that it might look ugly, unintuitive, and uselessly convoluted. This way it would work as intended, only read badly, and players who are not rules experts will not understand the rules technology that makes it work. To them it will look like you're first extending and then restricting permission and they won't even understand why. I'm not sure whether they'd print something like this for real, but if they did, that's how it would need to be worded for it to work as intended. I see no other way, and I do consider myself a rules expert.

Leo's personal aside

Show

Hide

If my real life didn't prevent me from doing it for personal reasons (NOT related to Magic in any way) that I won't get into here, I (and my friend too) think I could absolutely be a real judge. L1 for sure, and with good basis to think about trying L2 as well. Too bad I can't do it. I'd really like to be able to do it. Too bad they took away the "rules advisor" title, I might have wanted to try that at least. Isn't it strange to be able to do something that you can't do for real? It's as if you had a driving license but can't buy a car to drive because you don't have the money... I still love logic and logical systems like the CR, and no one will ever take that away from me. If I can't be a real judge, offering in-depth rules explanations like this one or the ones that I sometimes write in my MCC judgments is a good way, maybe the best way, I can put my deep rules knowledge to use. Yes, personal satisfaction in learning how your favorite game works is better than nothing, and being able to have not just one but TWO judge calls reverted in the 2HG prereleases I and my friend did so far because I (technically just a simple player!) took the initiative and explained thoroughly to the judge what exactly was going on on the board and how things should work in the rules only for the judge to reply "wait a minute while I go to check" and then come back, look at me, and say "yes, you were right" before reverting their ruling... Well, that already feels good, and I've rightfully corrected a judge call in a game I was involved in not even once, but twice in my life, it must mean I probably could be a judge like them too. It would be nice to have some kind of title for my deep rules knowledge that wouldn't require me to do things I can't easily do in real life... I wish I could take some kind of online test (make it as difficult as you want) and have something that says "this player knows what he does wery well even if he's not an official judge, and probably even better than some real judges actually do"... In the meantime, I will have to keep doing what I'm doing, dispensing rules knowledge whenever I can. Sorry for this personal aside.

[archemediesx]

Struggle of Champions 2RG
Sorcery (U)
Target creature you control gets +1/+0 until end of turn for each other creature you control, then it fights target creature you don't control. Then draw cards equal to the number of creatures who died during the fight.

Does this have a timing issue on the death clause? I.E. at the time of the final action of the spell since there are no delayed actions, creatures haven't been checked for lethal damage in state based actions to move them to the graveyard and trigger the draw cards? If so, it would probably need an 'until end of turn' on the draw portion of the effect to ensure that cards are drawn.

[bravelion83]

Struggle of Champions 2RG
Sorcery (U)
Target creature you control gets +1/+0 until end of turn for each other creature you control, then it fights target creature you don't control. Then draw cards equal to the number of creatures who died during the fight.

Does this have a timing issue on the death clause? I.E. at the time of the final action of the spell since there are no delayed actions, creatures haven't been checked for lethal damage in state based actions to move them to the graveyard and trigger the draw cards? If so, it would probably need an 'until end of turn' on the draw portion of the effect to ensure that cards are drawn.

Yes, you're correct. SBAs need to be checked for a creature with lethal damage marked on it to die, so this wording doesn't work. I didn't want it to be a delayed triggered ability, which is usually how they do it on real cards, using something like "Whenever a creature dies this turn" to avoid it also counting other creatures that might die in the same turn, but rather as an effect of the spell itself that happens during the resolution of the spell after the fight. So I posted this version. But I didn't see one thing here, and you're right on this, SBAs have to be checked for the creatures involved in the fight to die, so no creatures ever die during the fight because SBAs haven't been checked yet. See when I say that every time I try to go outside the box I fail? I should have probably made it a check on lethal damage having been marked on the creatures instead of those creatures dying. Something like this:

Struggle of Champions 2RG
Sorcery (U)
Target creature you control gets +1/+0 until end of turn for each other creature you control, then it fights target creature you don't control. Then draw a card for each creature that has been dealt lethal damage this way.

Maybe it's not the most elegant way, but I think this way it should work. You follow the instructions in order, so first the creatures fight, dealing damage to each other that stays marked on the creatures until SBAs are checked after this spell has finished resolving, then you check how many creatures didn't have lethal damage marked on them before this spell began resolving but do now after the damage dealt in the resolution of the fight, and you draw that many cards as the last effect of this spell. Now the spell has finished resolving and is put into the graveyard, and after that a player is about to receive priority, so it's time for the SBA check that makes the lethally damaged creatures actually be put in the graveyard (aka "die"), then any eventual triggered abilities that are waiting to be put onto the stack are put onto the stack (assume none), and finally the player receives priority. Ok, I went through this step by step now, and it looks to me likes it works as intended now. Thanks for making me notice.

[void_nothing]

Yes, this is a good use case for the old lethal damage tech if you don't want to use "dies this turn" or something.

[OneAndOnly]

Although I hate mixing tenses in a single sentence, "Whenever a creature that fought this way dies this turn...," should work. It does have the side-effect of possibly turning one "draw two cards" into two, very separate "draw one card" events, but that's actually inherent in the version you originally posted (and why it needs to be a delayed trigger).

"Dealing lethal damage" != "dies," since you have to account for indestructible and some other sundry effects.

[bravelion83]

"Whenever a creature that fought this way dies this turn...," should work.

It would, but it would also include the case when a creature fought, survived the fight, and then took lethal damage afterwards. I wanted to exclude those cases instead and have the effect work if the creature that fought died because of the damage it took from the fight itself, not later. That's why I chose to not make a delayed trigger.

turning one "draw two cards" into two, very separate "draw one card" events

That happens anyway. To "draw two cards" you already draw the cards one at a time according to the CR.

"Dealing lethal damage" != "dies," since you have to account for indestructible and some other sundry effects.

Indeed, and that's the ultimate source of my mistake. I confused dying with being lethally damaged. Very different things in reality, and I know that. I don't know why I forgot while designing this card. I blame it, as many other things, on my own brain. It knows what it did.

[OneAndOnly]

"Whenever a creature that fought this way dies this turn...," should work.

It would, but it would also include the case when a creature fought, survived the fight, and then took lethal damage afterwards. I wanted to exclude those cases instead and have the effect work if the creature that fought died because of the damage it took from the fight itself, not later. That's why I chose to not make a delayed trigger.

Great. That's something that neither your original nor revised version seem to handle, though.

Many cards with similar flavor (OG Sengir Vampire, et al.) accept that the creature might die later than when damage is dealt, but I leave that up to you.

turning one "draw two cards" into two, very separate "draw one card" events

That happens anyway. To "draw two cards" you already draw the cards one at a time according to the CR.

Yeah, this is pretty well established. But drawing one card now plus one card later isn't the same as drawing two cards, and has its implications for some effects. My point is simply that, the way most similar cards work mechanically, you may end up with two separate draw effects, whereas the version you want would only trigger once (whether it's for one card or two.)

"Dealing lethal damage" != "dies," since you have to account for indestructible and some other sundry effects.

Indeed, and that's the ultimate source of my mistake. I confused dying with being lethally damaged. Very different things in reality, and I know that. I don't know why I forgot while designing this card. I blame it, as many other things, on my own brain. It knows what it did.

Ah, now if you would just be a lenient when judging others in contests.

I feel anything more on my part is just going to come across as haranguing and belaboring my point, so I'll leave off here.

[bravelion83]

Many cards with similar flavor (OG Sengir Vampire, et al.) accept that the creature might die later than when damage is dealt, but I leave that up to you.

I know. That was me trying to go outside my comfort zone and, as always, failing. I would have done it the classic way otherwise.

Ah, now if you would just be a lenient when judging others in contests.

I'm not being lenient with myself, at all. If anything, I'm even harsher with myself than with others, and by the way always remember that we're judging cards and not people here, it's something I often say when judging the MCC. I'm not "judging others", I'm "judging cards made by others". Very different thing. I would never dare judge anybody personally, neither here nor in real life. And anyway, I'm a perfectionist, in real life too. You have no idea how much this mistake I did here is burning me from within. I should have known, and most of all I should have realized it, and it's my fault for that, only my own fault. And also trust me, that "brain" reference at the end of my previous post wasn't random. I was not dismissing my mistake, and I would absolutely deduct points in several areas of the MCC rubric for my own card. This card as I first posted it in the daily thread would totally get a very low score by myself as a judge for sure in Viability and Elegance, probably Balance too. I was going for Uniqueness, but it didn't pay, as it never does for me. I keep trying it from time to time but it never works. I have to stay in my comfort zone and think in-the-box, I've learned it by now, but I still try sometimes and constantly fail (in real life too). Me blaming my own brain wasn't for style, or to try to ignore my mistake and just let it pass unseen. It's unfortunately my reality every single day. A few here know what I'm referring to, you probably don't, but those are very personal things that I'm not going to say here publicly, and what happened recently in my life has nothing to do with them, they were there way before that. Just know that part wasn't by chance, not at all.

[OneAndOnly]

Votes: wizyard, Rithaniel

Votes: Rithaniel, netn10
.
Scarg Mire Cloak
Artifact Land - Equipment {R}
T: Add B. Activate this ability only if a creature died this turn.
Equipped creature gets +2/+2 and has lifelink and deathtouch as long as a creature died this turn.
Reconfigure 1BB

Votes: marioguy3, void_nothing

Mark of Preservation 1w
Enchantment — Aura Rune (C)
Enchant noncreature permanent
As long as enchanted permanent is an Aura or Equipment, it has totem armor. (If enchanted or equipped permanent would be destroyed, instead remove all damage marked on it and destroy the Aura or Equipment.)
When enchanted permanent is destroyed, return Mark of Preservation to its owner's hand.

May I ask why my submission for this round was skipped? Was I disqualified for some reason?

[Rithaniel]

May I ask why my submission for this round was skipped? Was I disqualified for some reason?

My mistake. I was posting while half asleep. I'll get it added back in.

[netn10]

Votes: RattingRots, Caspernicus

False Lead U
Artifact - Clue (Common)
Disguise 2
When False Lead dies, if it was face-down, draw two cards.
2, Sacrifice False Lead: Draw a card.

netn10

Show

Hide

When False Lead dies, if it was face-down, draw two cards.

This ability doesn't work as probably intended. Currently, "dies" is only for creatures and planeswalkers, even if I agree with you that it should be used with any permanent. But that's not the problem. What doesn't make this work is the fact that a leaves-the-battlefield triggered ability, such as a death trigger like this, looks back in time to determine whether it should trigger, and when it looks back in time it sees a face-down creature with no abilities, including this one, so it doesn't see the ability being there on the face-doen permanent as it last was on the battlefield, so it doesn't trigger at all, regardless of the intervening if clause. To have this ability work as intended you need something that doesn't look back in time, like "from anywhere". If you write it like this:

When False Lead is put into your graveyard from anywhere, if it was face-down, draw two cards.

then it can trigger (depending on whether the intervening if is true or not), because "from anywhere" specifically doesn't look back in time despite still being a leaves-the-battlefield triggered ability. It's not functionally identical (for example it would theoretically count milling as well, which the original wording doesn't) but it's the closest I can think of to a triggered ability that can work as clearly intended here. By the way, the intervening if is checking for "face down", which is a status of a permanent, and permanents exists only on the battlefield, so the intervening if is only true, allowing the ability to trigger, if it's put from the battlefield to the graveyard, not from any other zone, where the status is nonexisting and thus undefined, so the intervening if is false in that case and the ability doesn't trigger anyway. Essentially, "from anywhere", which is necessary for the ability to not look back in time and not even trigger, is not really from anywhere, but only from the battlefield, and the intervening if takes care of excluding all other possible cases. So milling would NOT actually work, and that's why I said "theoretically" above, nor would anything else but the permanent dying, as intended. You need to say "from anywhere" and let the intervening if exclude the unwanted cases. It wouldn't be intuitive at all, because "from anywhere" is not actually from anywhere, only from the battlefield, and most players wouldn't understand why it needs to say "from anywhere" to work. I think this is why they haven't done something like this yet in real Magic.

@bravelion83 : Thanks for the extensive explanation. I do wonder how this could be neatly worded.

You need something that doesn't look back in time to detemine whether it triggers but that also checks the permanent as it was on the battlefield, possibly using last-known information. I just thought about a variation of my proposed wording:

When False Lead is put into your graveyard from anywhere, if it was a face-down permanent, draw two cards.

I've added the word "permanent" to the intervening if, so that the intervening if only checks permanents that were on the battlefield and not cards from other zones. Essentially, "from anywhere" is there and needed to prevent the ability from looking back in time and having it actually trigger from the graveyard (not 100% correct terminology, I know, just using it for clarity), but you don't want this to actually trigger from anywhere, but only if it was face-down on the battlefield. And what's the unique word for an object on the battlefield? A "permanent". Adding that word to the intervening if makes it only work if the face-down False Lead was actually on the battlefield, otherwise the intervening if will be false, preventing the ability to trigger at all. In short, "from anywhere" is there for the ability not to look back in time while the word "permanent" in the intervening if makes it so that it only triggers from a face-down False Lead that was actually face-down on the battlefield (otherwise it wouldn't be a "permanent" but a "permanent card" or a "permanent spell"), which I think was your original intent. I believe that this wording makes the functionality be exactly what you want, it's just that it might look ugly, unintuitive, and uselessly convoluted. This way it would work as intended, only read badly, and players who are not rules experts will not understand the rules technology that makes it work. To them it will look like you're first extending and then restricting permission and they won't even understand why. I'm not sure whether they'd print something like this for real, but if they did, that's how it would need to be worded for it to work as intended. I see no other way, and I do consider myself a rules expert.

Leo's personal aside

Show

Hide

If my real life didn't prevent me from doing it for personal reasons (NOT related to Magic in any way) that I won't get into here, I (and my friend too) think I could absolutely be a real judge. L1 for sure, and with good basis to think about trying L2 as well. Too bad I can't do it. I'd really like to be able to do it. Too bad they took away the "rules advisor" title, I might have wanted to try that at least. Isn't it strange to be able to do something that you can't do for real? It's as if you had a driving license but can't buy a car to drive because you don't have the money... I still love logic and logical systems like the CR, and no one will ever take that away from me. If I can't be a real judge, offering in-depth rules explanations like this one or the ones that I sometimes write in my MCC judgments is a good way, maybe the best way, I can put my deep rules knowledge to use. Yes, personal satisfaction in learning how your favorite game works is better than nothing, and being able to have not just one but TWO judge calls reverted in the 2HG prereleases I and my friend did so far because I (technically just a simple player!) took the initiative and explained thoroughly to the judge what exactly was going on on the board and how things should work in the rules only for the judge to reply "wait a minute while I go to check" and then come back, look at me, and say "yes, you were right" before reverting their ruling... Well, that already feels good, and I've rightfully corrected a judge call in a game I was involved in not even once, but twice in my life, it must mean I probably could be a judge like them too. It would be nice to have some kind of title for my deep rules knowledge that wouldn't require me to do things I can't easily do in real life... I wish I could take some kind of online test (make it as difficult as you want) and have something that says "this player knows what he does wery well even if he's not an official judge, and probably even better than some real judges actually do"... In the meantime, I will have to keep doing what I'm doing, dispensing rules knowledge whenever I can. Sorry for this personal aside.

I always learn something new from you Again, thanks for the extensive comment, it's very appreciated!

[bravelion83]

Necromantic Homicide 4BB
Instant (U)
Choose one —
• Destroy target creature.
• You may put a creature card from a graveyard onto the battlefield.
Entwine—Collect evidence 6. (Choose both if you exile cards with total mana value 6 or greater from your graveyard.)

bravelion83 (although if I'm understanding this correctly, if you killed then returned an opponents creature, it would still be under their control?)

@RattingRots No, it would be under your control. You've essentially stealed it like if it had an unremovable Mind Control on it, though by black means, and black is secondary in stealing creatures (or maybe tertiary, but anyway it can do it). You resolve the modes in the order they're written, so first you destroy their creature, which goes in their graveyard, and then the second mode returns it from their graveyard to the battlefield, but as you control the effect that's bringing the creature back, that creature will reenter the battlefield under your control by default, and here I don't specify anything different so the default applies, and you get the creature. This is both my intent behind this card and also the intentional way why I chose to write the card this way.

[RattingRots]

I assumed it didn't work that way because it was worded differently than Rise from the Grave and similar cards. IMO I would use the same wording because it's less ambiguous.

[wizyard]

the results aren't in yet but i think it's safe to call it-

congrats RattingRots, close one!

[RattingRots]

the results aren't in yet but i think it's safe to call it-

congrats RattingRots, close one!

Congrats! Photofinish. You had a lot of great cards this month.

[bravelion83]

I assumed it didn't work that way because it was worded differently than Rise from the Grave and similar cards. IMO I would use the same wording because it's less ambiguous.

Yes, you're right. I could have added "under your control" at the end of the second mode and the functionality would have been exactly the same with a clearer wording. I just didn't think of it. Thanks for making me notice anyway.

[marioguy3]

@bravelion83 I hope I wasn't coming across as complaining about the time extension. I was mainly commenting about me being more proactive posting early today. Real life comes first as always.

[bravelion83]

@bravelion83 I hope I wasn't coming across as complaining about the time extension. I was mainly commenting about me being more proactive posting early today. Real life comes first as always.

No, I didn't read it as a complaint, don't worry about that. I was just explaining to you why it had to be the case today. And as I'm already late, I can't continue this discussion now, I really have to go to bed. I always say it, and you've said yourself here too: real life always comes first. No worries, everything's fine.

[Rithaniel]

Side effect of having stopped (for the moment) to post about Vukanat: I don't know what to write here today, so this message is what you get today.

I feel that. Some nights it's all I can do to say "I'm tired."

[bravelion83]

In the savanna part of Bloomburrow, a pact was struck under the ancient Lion's Oak. Each participant, whether by claw or coin, claimed their share of the bounty. Some took more, some less, but all left with a tale to tell and a prize to cherish.

Are you sure it was Bloomburrow and not Vukanat? Because if this is an intended tribute to the stories from my custom plane that I've been sharing with you all until just a few days ago, you got a LOT of it right, even things that I haven't told you at all! (Not telling you now what those are, but I can count at least two of those, and one in particular is too evident to me, but I could swear that I've never told publicly that specific point of my story. No, there is no Lion's Oak on Vukanat. But there are other things...) Anyway, if it was an intended tribute, thank you.

[netn10]

In the savanna part of Bloomburrow, a pact was struck under the ancient Lion's Oak. Each participant, whether by claw or coin, claimed their share of the bounty. Some took more, some less, but all left with a tale to tell and a prize to cherish.

Are you sure it was Bloomburrow and not Vukanat? Because if this is an intended tribute to the stories from my custom plane that I've been sharing with you all until just a few days ago, you got a LOT of it right, even things that I haven't told you at all! (Not telling you now what those are, but I can count at least two of those, and one in particular is too evident to me, but I could swear that I've never told publicly that specific point of my story. No, there is no Lion's Oak on Vukanat. But there are other things...) Anyway, if it was an intended tribute, thank you.

That's just a very, VERY cool coincidence Take it as a gift from me though. When I think about lions and especially custom cards, I think about you!