i'll start putting together the thread for day 1 rn
Dang it! I was gonna take a month off, but there's no way I'm missing a Rudyard hosted MCC.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
(22 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
(8 Total) - May 2015; May 2016; June 2016; August 2016; October 2016; December 2016; October 2017; May 2019
(7 Total) - September 2015; October 2015; January 2016; March 2016; April 2016; July 2016(T); March 2019(T)
I can tell you as a (potential) judge, that doing multiple cards for round one is extremely time consuming. Having to apply a rubric to multiple cards from 6-7+ people is a big commitment. So I'll probably pass.
Doubt this is the case but because MCC is famously particular I just want to verify...
Subchallenge 1 reads: one of the cards is multicolored or colorless.
If both cards are multicolored or colorless does this fail the subchallenge? Or do you mean at least one of the cards. I ask because one of my designs is multicolored and the other is colorless and I want to be sure this will qualify for the point.
Doubt this is the case but because MCC is famously particular I just want to verify...
Subchallenge 1 reads: one of the cards is multicolored or colorless.
If both cards are multicolored or colorless does this fail the subchallenge? Or do you mean at least one of the cards. I ask because one of my designs is multicolored and the other is colorless and I want to be sure this will qualify for the point.
thanks again to kjsharp for offering to judge a some entries this round, but i have instead decided to take on twice as many entries as the other judges this round.
Do you intend to split your bracket into two brackets, or will you just be advancing twice as many people? Either way, that is a lot of judging. I suppose I could judge if you want me to, although I'd prefer to participate as a contestant.
Edit: It would stay truer to the contest if you split your giant bracket into two brackets.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
(22 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
(8 Total) - May 2015; May 2016; June 2016; August 2016; October 2016; December 2016; October 2017; May 2019
(7 Total) - September 2015; October 2015; January 2016; March 2016; April 2016; July 2016(T); March 2019(T)
Hey Rudyard, I don't want to know what you must be going through. I judged 3 contestants out of 6 so far. So mere 6 cards out of 12. And I'm already at the end of my sanity, and deep into the night and very tired. I hope it's fine if I bring this to an end tomorrow. Because, if it's not fine, I can't do anything about it anyways, sorry
I didn't even think I'd ever have to consider this, but as CCC mod I'm going to bypass getting the consensus of the community for one MCC rule amendment -
MCC challenges must only be to design one card per round.
(2,5/3) Quality: There's no perfect example, but Chittering Host indicates that haste is listed before menace. There are only three other creatures that have both words in their text box, all listing a whole bunch of other abilites.
I feel like I'm explaining this on a monthly basis now but, menace definitely comes before haste in a single line of abilities that have no reminder text. The only reason haste comes first on Chittering Host is because menace has reminder text. The combination of Dire Fleet Ravager and Queen Marchesa show us that menace comes before haste if neither has reminder text. Here's a whole thing I wrote about it a couple of months ago.....
Flash
Defender, flying, first strike, double strike, menace, vigilance, reach, deathtouch, trample, lifelink, hexproof, indestructible, haste, protection from <name>
?Prowess?
Here's a synopsis of how I arrived at the list I did....
- The cards Akroma, Angel of Wrath and Chromanticore give a good baseline to start with. They show us the following order: Flying, first strike, vigilance, trample, lifelink, haste, protection from <name>.
That leaves us with the following keywords to figure out: defender, prowess, double strike, menace, reach, deathtouch, hexproof, and indestructible. Here's how I placed each of them...
Defender - Fog Bank shows us defender comes before flying. Simple. Double strike - Kalemne, Disciple of Iroas shows us that double strike comes before vigilance. Drogskol Reaver shows us it comes after flying. It's not possible to say for sure which comes first, first strike or double strike, but I think it makes sense that first strike would come first. Menace - Kari Zev, Skyship Raider shows us that menace comes after first strike, and Dire Fleet Ravager shows us that it comes before deathtouch, so it could fall anywhere in between those two abilities. I think it would come before vigilance and reach because it has to do with how the creature can be blocked, which seems to be given a lot of weight if flying is taken as an example. I'm actually surprised it doesn't come between flying and first strike, like the ability (intimidate) it replaced did.I'm not sure the crossed out sentence is true. All that can be said for sure is, intimidate came somewhere between flying and trample, as can be seen on Withengar Unbound. Reach - Ramunap Hydra shows us reach comes after vigilance. Deadly Recluse shows us that it comes before deathtouch. I think Deadly Recluse can be trusted because both abilities have their reminder text. Deathtouch - Deadly Recluse shows that deathtouch comes after reach. Gifted Aetherborn shows us that it comes before lifelink. It is impossible to say whether deathtouch comes before or after trample, but I think deathtouch coming before trample would make more sense for a card that had both (which has never been printed). Hexproof - Ormendahl, Profane Prince shows us that indestructible comes after lifelink. Insidious Mist shows us that hexproof comes before indestructible. Indestructible - Insidious Mist shows us that indestructible comes after hexproof. Hazoret the Fervent shows us that it comes before haste. Prowess - This one is impossible to say because Wizards has yet to print a card with prowess that doesn't include the reminder text (as least not that I could find). I put it where I did because I felt like it. Which is why I list it separately from everything else.
I did this as quickly as I could, so please excuse an errors or omissions. I hope my reasoning for the list makes sense. If there is anything glaringly wrong with the list, or my reasoning behind it, please feel free to respond. It would be cool to make this list as accurate as possible.
Edit: I changed the list so that prowess was listed separately from everything else. I don't want to give anybody using the list for reference to get the wrong idea. I'm also unsure about my placement of menace, although I'm all but certain it comes between first strike and deathtouch. I'm pretty confidant about the rest of it.
(2,5/3) Quality: There's a doubling in the flavor text in "is more is more". No other flaws detected.
This is a site flaw. If you quote my post, you will see that my flavor text does not contain this flaw, but for some reason the site doesn't diplay it correctly in my post. Here's a quote of my post that shows that the error was corrected.....
Devastating Loss3BB
Instant (C)
Destroy up to two target creatures with converted mana cost two or less. The loss of one parent is difficult enough, losing both is more than most can bear.
I jump ahead of two people if these scoring mistakes are corrected.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
(22 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
(8 Total) - May 2015; May 2016; June 2016; August 2016; October 2016; December 2016; October 2017; May 2019
(7 Total) - September 2015; October 2015; January 2016; March 2016; April 2016; July 2016(T); March 2019(T)
I think Rudyard joined Opus Dei, and he got Antiantiserum and void_nothing to tag along for the ride
If I could propose one amendment to your new amendment void. I think simply requiring the approval of the other judges to do more than one card would suffice. I can envision various challenges where you could judge the cards together using one pass on the rubric, and toward the later stages of the competition where there are fewer participants I could imagine such a challenge being okay. Requiring the pre-approval of the other judges would avoid this type of problem from occurring in the future.
Of course, it might be best to just flat out dictate that only one card per challenge is allowed. Just proposing this alternative to see if you think that this might be a bit more flexible while still preventing the problem we're trying to avoid.
Thanks Antiantiserum. I didn't mean to sound so harsh in my previous post. I was in a hurry when I wrote it. Both of the discrepancies are perfectly understandable. The site related one is frustrating because I'm aware of the issue the site has recognizing post edits, and I swear I double checked to make sure mine took.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
(22 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
(8 Total) - May 2015; May 2016; June 2016; August 2016; October 2016; December 2016; October 2017; May 2019
(7 Total) - September 2015; October 2015; January 2016; March 2016; April 2016; July 2016(T); March 2019(T)
Im used to it being an option to do two card challenges for the finals, since at most you should have four players to judge. It's a pity that someone elses mistake would limit that.
I agree that two card challenges should be allowed for the finals.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
(22 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
(8 Total) - May 2015; May 2016; June 2016; August 2016; October 2016; December 2016; October 2017; May 2019
(7 Total) - September 2015; October 2015; January 2016; March 2016; April 2016; July 2016(T); March 2019(T)
I mean, I don't. Not as long as we're using the MCC rubric.
I realize it did happen about five times in this unusual period around 2014-2015, but that was an aberration and we shouldn't be encouraging organizers to do the same today. The whole MCC system is built around judging criteria designed to score single cards.
I thought it had happened during the finals several times recently without a hitch. I may be thinking of the CCL though.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
(22 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
(8 Total) - May 2015; May 2016; June 2016; August 2016; October 2016; December 2016; October 2017; May 2019
(7 Total) - September 2015; October 2015; January 2016; March 2016; April 2016; July 2016(T); March 2019(T)
Rudyard: The flavor of both my round 1 cards is directly taken from the Planeswalker's Guide to Alara. Ten is an appropriate age for that rite, as few human residents of Jund live to be older than 30
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A mere ten days after the Mending, a young knight of Valeron and a young ranger of Eos made a discovery that would change Alara forever.
My favorite painter is Thomas Cole, and he did a cycle of paintings on this very subject. They now sit in the National Gallery in DC. http://www.explorethomascole.org/tour/items/73/series/
I had a copy of Youth in my bedroom growing up.
nice! i can use those paintings for inspiration
@Raptorchan- as far as i'm concerned a creature with the creature type Child would be appropriate, but if other judges disagree that's up to them.
Subchallenge 1 reads: one of the cards is multicolored or colorless.
If both cards are multicolored or colorless does this fail the subchallenge? Or do you mean at least one of the cards. I ask because one of my designs is multicolored and the other is colorless and I want to be sure this will qualify for the point.
Thanks.
You can enter 'em but no guarantee your judge will like 'em.
(Also, I won't take off points for any Child type cards.)
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
at least one, but not limited to just one
Edit: It would stay truer to the contest if you split your giant bracket into two brackets.
I didn't even think I'd ever have to consider this, but as CCC mod I'm going to bypass getting the consensus of the community for one MCC rule amendment -
MCC challenges must only be to design one card per round.
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
I feel like I'm explaining this on a monthly basis now but, menace definitely comes before haste in a single line of abilities that have no reminder text. The only reason haste comes first on Chittering Host is because menace has reminder text. The combination of Dire Fleet Ravager and Queen Marchesa show us that menace comes before haste if neither has reminder text. Here's a whole thing I wrote about it a couple of months ago.....
This is a site flaw. If you quote my post, you will see that my flavor text does not contain this flaw, but for some reason the site doesn't diplay it correctly in my post. Here's a quote of my post that shows that the error was corrected.....
I jump ahead of two people if these scoring mistakes are corrected.
If I could propose one amendment to your new amendment void. I think simply requiring the approval of the other judges to do more than one card would suffice. I can envision various challenges where you could judge the cards together using one pass on the rubric, and toward the later stages of the competition where there are fewer participants I could imagine such a challenge being okay. Requiring the pre-approval of the other judges would avoid this type of problem from occurring in the future.
Of course, it might be best to just flat out dictate that only one card per challenge is allowed. Just proposing this alternative to see if you think that this might be a bit more flexible while still preventing the problem we're trying to avoid.
I realize it did happen about five times in this unusual period around 2014-2015, but that was an aberration and we shouldn't be encouraging organizers to do the same today. The whole MCC system is built around judging criteria designed to score single cards.
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
Emille, Seven-Sting Dancer Shalin Nariya
It sounds like Rudyard is going through some crazy times. I hope you're hanging in there Rudyard!