Ok, all the data is there, so it's time to declare a winner for March. And that winner is...
mirrorentity
Congratulations to him/her and thanks to everyone who played or judged this month! You can find the detailed final scores in the round thread.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
MCC - Winner (6): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019 || Host (15): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here) || Judge (34): 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 one here) CCL - Winner (3): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last one here) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016 DCC - Winner (1): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar) || Host (3): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016
• The two public custom sets I've been part a part of the design team for: "Brotherhood of Ormos" - Blog post with all info - set thread - design skeleton / card list || "Extinctia: Homo Evanuit" - Blog post with all info - set thread - card list spreadsheet
• "The Lion's Lair", my article series about MTG and custom card design in particular. Latest article here. Here is the article index.Rather outdated by now, and based on the old MCC rubric, but I'm leaving this here for anybody that might be interested anyway.
• My only public attempt at being a writer: the story of my Leonin custom planeswalker Jeff Lionheart. (I have a very big one that I'm working on right now but that's private for now, and I don't know if I will ever actually publish it, and I also have ideas for multiple future ones, including one where I'm going to reprise Jeff.)
(2/3) Quality - The order of mana symbols in the mana cost is wrong, it should be 4GW (half a point deducted). In the flavor text, I think "theirs" should be "hers". Saffi is a woman, and you've already mentioned "his life" that covers Erik's one (half a point deducted).
Ah DAMMIT I meant both Hans and Saffi died as well, but I forgot that Hans didn't die
Oh man, I can't even count the number of times I got the ordering of colors in mana costs wrong =)).
To be fair, I never set out to look it up either. Hoisted by my own petard, as it were.
Not only in mana cost, anywhere on a Magic card whenever there are two or more different mana symbols together, they follow a set order. To look for it (which I totally advise you to start doing), just look at the color wheel on the back of any non-DFC Magic card and look for the shortest clockwise path that includes all the colors you're looking for. The only exception to this was wedge costs in KTK block. Then, generic mana always comes first and X's come before set amounts of generic mana. For an example that includes everything of this, just look no further than SOI: Altered Ego's mana cost is X2GU. X comes before 2, which together come before colored mana, where the clockwise path from G to U is G > W > U, while from U to G it would be U > B > R > G. The shortest one of the two is the first, so G comes before U.
MCC - Winner (6): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019 || Host (15): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here) || Judge (34): 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 one here) CCL - Winner (3): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last one here) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016 DCC - Winner (1): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar) || Host (3): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016
• The two public custom sets I've been part a part of the design team for: "Brotherhood of Ormos" - Blog post with all info - set thread - design skeleton / card list || "Extinctia: Homo Evanuit" - Blog post with all info - set thread - card list spreadsheet
• "The Lion's Lair", my article series about MTG and custom card design in particular. Latest article here. Here is the article index.Rather outdated by now, and based on the old MCC rubric, but I'm leaving this here for anybody that might be interested anyway.
• My only public attempt at being a writer: the story of my Leonin custom planeswalker Jeff Lionheart. (I have a very big one that I'm working on right now but that's private for now, and I don't know if I will ever actually publish it, and I also have ideas for multiple future ones, including one where I'm going to reprise Jeff.)
Scepter of Ages5
Legendary Artifact (M)
At the beginning of your upkeep, put an age counter on Scepter of Ages. Then choose X, where X is the number of age counters on Scepter of Ages. You may choose the same mode more than once.
• Scepter of Ages deals 1 damage to target creature or player.
• You gain 2 life.
• Tap target permanent. Every era imbues a spell granting it limitless potential.
Design
(1.5/3) Appeal - I get the idea of an artifact absorbing spells, but I think it might have been more interesting if done as a "whenever a player casts the first spell of his turn" or some other version that implied spells being absorbed/placed/etc into the artifact.
(1/3) Elegance - I feel like if you want a "do it all" kind of artifact, it should either have five abilities, one from each color. I like the gain life/deal damage dichotomy, but the "tap target permanent" feels tacked on.
Development
(2.5/3) Viability - The "choose X" followed by the tons of text is... awkward. It probably works as written, but it sounds ugly.
(1/3) Balance - This is only really useful in EDH, heavy ramp decks or hard core control decks, as you're not really getting your money's worth until this thing has been out quite a few turns.
Creativity
(1/3) Uniqueness - A bit? I feel it plays in the same area a lot of other equipment does, like Staff of Nin, for example.
(1.5/3) Flavor - It's ok, but the flavor text isn't really selling it for me. It's a bit underwhelming. The name is nice.
Polish
(2.5/3) Quality
(2/2) Main Challenge
(2/2) Subchallenges
Total: 15/25
Did you read the rubric before become a judge? Your critiques don't follow the rubric criteria. I know, because I helped write it.
Icarii, I did but I was in a bit of a rush so I did mix a few things up. I should've spent more time putting things in the right sections. For instance, my section for appeal should probably be uniqueness. I wasn't sure where to put the "choose x" criticism, but on reflection it would've fit better in elegance than viability. I apologize if my judging wasn't fully up to snuff this round, and I'll take more time in my critique next round.
Icarii, I did but I was in a bit of a rush so I did mix a few things up. I should've spent more time putting things in the right sections. For instance, my section for appeal should probably be uniqueness. I wasn't sure where to put the "choose x" criticism, but on reflection it would've fit better in elegance than viability. I apologize if my judging wasn't fully up to snuff this round, and I'll take more time in my critique next round.
Yeah, the appeals section is wrong. Is supposed to be about whether timmy/Johnny/and or Spike would like the card, and you talked about flavor (which it isn't a staff that absorbs spells, it's a staff that gains spells as time goes on, so I don't get your suggestion.)
In elegance you say that I either should of done a five color things or... nothing. You left out the other half of your thought. So I don't know what you're suggesting. Regardless I can point to numerous artifact cards where your logic doesn't stand.
In viability, you refer to clunky wording (which is elegance, not viability).
In quality, you mark off half point with no explanation. This is particularly baffling, as other cards with formatting/templating errors you gave full points to.
While I'm not looking to disagree with your opinions on the rest of your review, that fact is, this isn't a fair judging since it doesn't follow the rubric. I don't care If I move on the the next round, but I want I fair score and a fair judge.
In elegance you say that I either should of done a five color things or... nothing. You left out the other half of your thought. So I don't know what you're suggesting. Regardless I can point to numerous artifact cards where your logic doesn't stand.
Sorry to intervene, but as a short aside. By the MCC's judging standards, a lot of actual printed cards (and I'm not just talking about the older sets) would get graded pretty harshly by the average judge (and rightly so). So while real, official cards are a great reference for things like wording/formatting/viability, I would avoid using them as reference for other categories, especially elegance.
You're right. The problem here though is I was given one incomplete example of why LnGrrrR felt my card was inelegant, and his example doesn't work as justification. Every artifact that has 3 or more activated abilities shouldn't be required to be 5 abilities, one of each color, to be considered elegant.
I have some ideas for a MCC. Could I organize May?
And I'd like to introduce an experiment I'd call the "loser bracket".
After the first round I'll put up a thread for the players that didn't make it into round two.
They will have to correct their cards based on the judgements. Before round two ends I'll select the better half, maybe with a little feedback.
However they still can't enter round three, but instead the second loser bracket, which will also contain everyone who didn't make it into round three.
Now everyone from the first bracket posts their idea for round two. Everyone from round two posts corrections again. I select the best entry (singular).
This player will enter the final round together with the winners from round 3. There are no more loser brackets.
Sounds fun? I'd put a poll into the final round to ask players how they liked it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
—Eli Shiffrin, Rules Manager, on a design stacking lifelink instances
I have some ideas for a MCC. Could I organize May?
And I'd like to introduce an experiment I'd call the "loser bracket".
After the first round I'll put up a thread for the players that didn't make it into round two.
They will have to correct their cards based on the judgements. Before round two ends I'll select the better half, maybe with a little feedback.
However they still can't enter round three, but instead the second loser bracket, which will also contain everyone who didn't make it into round three.
Now everyone from the first bracket posts their idea for round two. Everyone from round two posts corrections again. I select the best entry (singular).
This player will enter the final round together with the winners from round 3. There are no more loser brackets.
Sounds fun? I'd put a poll into the final round to ask players how they liked it.
Sounds like too much work.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
I guess it's too much work with already doing all the other stuff. Maybe I could try it when someone else organizes.
After all it's just two rounds and a bit of commenting on the cards.
Well, my idea for May doesn't depend on it, so I can do without.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
—Eli Shiffrin, Rules Manager, on a design stacking lifelink instances
I have some ideas for a MCC. Could I organize May?
And I'd like to introduce an experiment I'd call the "loser bracket".
After the first round I'll put up a thread for the players that didn't make it into round two.
They will have to correct their cards based on the judgements. Before round two ends I'll select the better half, maybe with a little feedback.
However they still can't enter round three, but instead the second loser bracket, which will also contain everyone who didn't make it into round three.
Now everyone from the first bracket posts their idea for round two. Everyone from round two posts corrections again. I select the best entry (singular).
This player will enter the final round together with the winners from round 3. There are no more loser brackets.
Sounds fun? I'd put a poll into the final round to ask players how they liked it.
Sounds like too much work.
I was about to post the same thing. To me it looks like too much work for too little gain.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
MCC - Winner (6): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019 || Host (15): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here) || Judge (34): 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 one here) CCL - Winner (3): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last one here) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016 DCC - Winner (1): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar) || Host (3): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016
• The two public custom sets I've been part a part of the design team for: "Brotherhood of Ormos" - Blog post with all info - set thread - design skeleton / card list || "Extinctia: Homo Evanuit" - Blog post with all info - set thread - card list spreadsheet
• "The Lion's Lair", my article series about MTG and custom card design in particular. Latest article here. Here is the article index.Rather outdated by now, and based on the old MCC rubric, but I'm leaving this here for anybody that might be interested anyway.
• My only public attempt at being a writer: the story of my Leonin custom planeswalker Jeff Lionheart. (I have a very big one that I'm working on right now but that's private for now, and I don't know if I will ever actually publish it, and I also have ideas for multiple future ones, including one where I'm going to reprise Jeff.)
The loser bracket idea does sound like a lot of work to run every month. But I would be interested in seeing it. Iteration is an important part of the design process that I'd like to see explored more.
I guess it's too much work with already doing all the other stuff. Maybe I could try it when someone else organizes.
After all it's just two rounds and a bit of commenting on the cards.
Well, my idea for May doesn't depend on it, so I can do without.
You can try it when someone else runs it, for the sake of experimenting. In the meantime, you can run the May MCC.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
Scepter of Ages5
Legendary Artifact (M)
At the beginning of your upkeep, put an age counter on Scepter of Ages. Then choose X, where X is the number of age counters on Scepter of Ages. You may choose the same mode more than once.
• Scepter of Ages deals 1 damage to target creature or player.
• You gain 2 life.
• Tap target permanent. Every era imbues a spell granting it limitless potential.
Design -
(1.5/3) Appeal: I think this is mostly a Johnny/Vorthos card. Spike would probably try to get it to work, but it doesn't do enough in a control shell, and ramp probably wants a bigger impact at 5 CMC.
(2.5/3) Elegance: A super old, super powerful wand, straight from Dungeons and Dragons.Well, maybe not super powerful, but besides the "choose X age counters" thing it's pretty easily understood.
Development -
(1.5/3) Viability: Looking at the abilities, we have "deal 1 damage" (R), "gain 2 life" (Wg), and "tap target permanent" (Uw). I would've liked to see an ability that was "black".
(1/3) Balance: This card is just slow, for such little payoff. You're paying 5 CMC, and it doesn't come online until the first turn, in which it taps 1 permanent, or gains you two life, or deals 1 damage. This thing doesn't really break even on its return until it's been out at least three turns, which means without ramp you have to last until... turn 9? It would've been better at a lower CMC, or a higher CMC with more damaging abilities. Another option would've been to add symmetry to the abilities. What about "target players draws a card/discards a card", "tap/untap target permanent", "target player gains/loses 2 life", etc etc? This might've been a way to cover all five colors of magic, as I think an epic "scepter of ages" should. (Discard/draw a card is UB for instance, and gain life/lose life would cover Wg/B). Much like how Etherwrought Page covers the three colors. I know that's slightly different since it actually contains those colors, but if you're giving me an epic scepter that absorbs spells... it has to feel epic to me. Another option to explore would've focused on the "absorbing" spells bit, where maybe this spell could exile cards to cast with it similar to Isochron Scepter. Finally, being legendary hurts it as duplicates are useless. Not sure what playgroup would use this card, besides maybe some sort of mono U proliferate EDH deck... and that's a stretch.
Creativity -
(2/3) Uniqueness: We've seen cards that do modals before, but not many artifacts.
(2.5/3) Flavor: I like the idea behind the card. Scepter of Ages sounds pretty nice.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
(2/2) *Main Challenge: Was the main challenge satisfied? Was it approached in a unique or interesting way? Does the card fit the intent of the challenge?
(2/2) Subchallenges: One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Shoot! I can't believe I forgot about suspend cards! I should've just added X can't be zero. Anyway, thanks to the judges for setting me straight, and good luck to everyone advancing.
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)
If it makes you feel better, I loved your flavor text pulling double duty. Very clever.
Thanks.
I just realized, I would have to drop the "or less" from the card along with adding X can't be zero. Not that anybody cares.
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 guess the flavor is a miss if you didn't judge my other cards. They all tie together (as in, they'd be in the same set).
I was trying to go for tutor meets reverse Gifts Ungiven in a sense. Guess it was a miss. I was tempted to make it cost 4 but felt that it was too strong. I don't think getting full points for flavor lets me advance, however, but I suppose a few more couldn't hurt.
I guess the flavor is a miss if you didn't judge my other cards. They all tie together (as in, they'd be in the same set).
I was trying to go for tutor meets reverse Gifts Ungiven in a sense. Guess it was a miss. I was tempted to make it cost 4 but felt that it was too strong. I don't think getting full points for flavor lets me advance, however, but I suppose a few more couldn't hurt.
For what it counts, I understood the flavor just fine and I didn't even think of looking at your cards from previous rounds. I didn't remember them as I was writing my judgment for this round's card of yours, I still don't remember them (I would have to go relook at them) and I had to go look at the Excel file I use for judging to see that I judged both of them myself. I also don't think your card for this round was a miss at all, even though this is just my opinion of course. It would certainly have been too strong at four mana and I'm glad you didn't go with that. Please read the note I've added at the top of my judgment post, as it's particularly addressed to you. By the way, those judgments are now complete and hopefully final.
MCC - Winner (6): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019 || Host (15): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here) || Judge (34): 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 one here) CCL - Winner (3): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last one here) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016 DCC - Winner (1): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar) || Host (3): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016
• The two public custom sets I've been part a part of the design team for: "Brotherhood of Ormos" - Blog post with all info - set thread - design skeleton / card list || "Extinctia: Homo Evanuit" - Blog post with all info - set thread - card list spreadsheet
• "The Lion's Lair", my article series about MTG and custom card design in particular. Latest article here. Here is the article index.Rather outdated by now, and based on the old MCC rubric, but I'm leaving this here for anybody that might be interested anyway.
• My only public attempt at being a writer: the story of my Leonin custom planeswalker Jeff Lionheart. (I have a very big one that I'm working on right now but that's private for now, and I don't know if I will ever actually publish it, and I also have ideas for multiple future ones, including one where I'm going to reprise Jeff.)
mirrorentity
Congratulations to him/her and thanks to everyone who played or judged this month! You can find the detailed final scores in the round thread.
MCC - Winner (6): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019 || Host (15): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here) || Judge (34): 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 one here)
CCL - Winner (3): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last one here) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016
DCC - Winner (1): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar) || Host (3): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016
• The two public custom sets I've been part a part of the design team for:
"Brotherhood of Ormos" - Blog post with all info - set thread - design skeleton / card list || "Extinctia: Homo Evanuit" - Blog post with all info - set thread - card list spreadsheet
• "The Lion's Lair", my article series about MTG and custom card design in particular. Latest article here. Here is the article index. Rather outdated by now, and based on the old MCC rubric, but I'm leaving this here for anybody that might be interested anyway.
• My only public attempt at being a writer: the story of my Leonin custom planeswalker Jeff Lionheart. (I have a very big one that I'm working on right now but that's private for now, and I don't know if I will ever actually publish it, and I also have ideas for multiple future ones, including one where I'm going to reprise Jeff.)
Ah DAMMIT I meant both Hans and Saffi died as well, but I forgot that Hans didn't die
Revenant
Done
Not only in mana cost, anywhere on a Magic card whenever there are two or more different mana symbols together, they follow a set order. To look for it (which I totally advise you to start doing), just look at the color wheel on the back of any non-DFC Magic card and look for the shortest clockwise path that includes all the colors you're looking for. The only exception to this was wedge costs in KTK block. Then, generic mana always comes first and X's come before set amounts of generic mana. For an example that includes everything of this, just look no further than SOI: Altered Ego's mana cost is X2GU. X comes before 2, which together come before colored mana, where the clockwise path from G to U is G > W > U, while from U to G it would be U > B > R > G. The shortest one of the two is the first, so G comes before U.
MCC - Winner (6): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019 || Host (15): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here) || Judge (34): 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 one here)
CCL - Winner (3): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last one here) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016
DCC - Winner (1): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar) || Host (3): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016
• The two public custom sets I've been part a part of the design team for:
"Brotherhood of Ormos" - Blog post with all info - set thread - design skeleton / card list || "Extinctia: Homo Evanuit" - Blog post with all info - set thread - card list spreadsheet
• "The Lion's Lair", my article series about MTG and custom card design in particular. Latest article here. Here is the article index. Rather outdated by now, and based on the old MCC rubric, but I'm leaving this here for anybody that might be interested anyway.
• My only public attempt at being a writer: the story of my Leonin custom planeswalker Jeff Lionheart. (I have a very big one that I'm working on right now but that's private for now, and I don't know if I will ever actually publish it, and I also have ideas for multiple future ones, including one where I'm going to reprise Jeff.)
Did you read the rubric before become a judge? Your critiques don't follow the rubric criteria. I know, because I helped write it.
Club Flamingo Wins: 1!
Round 2 is up.
Yeah, the appeals section is wrong. Is supposed to be about whether timmy/Johnny/and or Spike would like the card, and you talked about flavor (which it isn't a staff that absorbs spells, it's a staff that gains spells as time goes on, so I don't get your suggestion.)
In elegance you say that I either should of done a five color things or... nothing. You left out the other half of your thought. So I don't know what you're suggesting. Regardless I can point to numerous artifact cards where your logic doesn't stand.
In viability, you refer to clunky wording (which is elegance, not viability).
In quality, you mark off half point with no explanation. This is particularly baffling, as other cards with formatting/templating errors you gave full points to.
While I'm not looking to disagree with your opinions on the rest of your review, that fact is, this isn't a fair judging since it doesn't follow the rubric. I don't care If I move on the the next round, but I want I fair score and a fair judge.
You're right. The problem here though is I was given one incomplete example of why LnGrrrR felt my card was inelegant, and his example doesn't work as justification. Every artifact that has 3 or more activated abilities shouldn't be required to be 5 abilities, one of each color, to be considered elegant.
And I'd like to introduce an experiment I'd call the "loser bracket".
After the first round I'll put up a thread for the players that didn't make it into round two.
They will have to correct their cards based on the judgements. Before round two ends I'll select the better half, maybe with a little feedback.
However they still can't enter round three, but instead the second loser bracket, which will also contain everyone who didn't make it into round three.
Now everyone from the first bracket posts their idea for round two. Everyone from round two posts corrections again. I select the best entry (singular).
This player will enter the final round together with the winners from round 3. There are no more loser brackets.
Sounds fun? I'd put a poll into the final round to ask players how they liked it.
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
—Eli Shiffrin, Rules Manager, on a design stacking lifelink instances
Club Flamingo Wins: 1!
Sounds like too much work.
After all it's just two rounds and a bit of commenting on the cards.
Well, my idea for May doesn't depend on it, so I can do without.
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
—Eli Shiffrin, Rules Manager, on a design stacking lifelink instances
I was about to post the same thing. To me it looks like too much work for too little gain.
MCC - Winner (6): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019 || Host (15): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here) || Judge (34): 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 one here)
CCL - Winner (3): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last one here) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016
DCC - Winner (1): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar) || Host (3): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016
• The two public custom sets I've been part a part of the design team for:
"Brotherhood of Ormos" - Blog post with all info - set thread - design skeleton / card list || "Extinctia: Homo Evanuit" - Blog post with all info - set thread - card list spreadsheet
• "The Lion's Lair", my article series about MTG and custom card design in particular. Latest article here. Here is the article index. Rather outdated by now, and based on the old MCC rubric, but I'm leaving this here for anybody that might be interested anyway.
• My only public attempt at being a writer: the story of my Leonin custom planeswalker Jeff Lionheart. (I have a very big one that I'm working on right now but that's private for now, and I don't know if I will ever actually publish it, and I also have ideas for multiple future ones, including one where I'm going to reprise Jeff.)
Design -
(1.5/3) Appeal: I think this is mostly a Johnny/Vorthos card. Spike would probably try to get it to work, but it doesn't do enough in a control shell, and ramp probably wants a bigger impact at 5 CMC.
(2.5/3) Elegance: A super old, super powerful wand, straight from Dungeons and Dragons.Well, maybe not super powerful, but besides the "choose X age counters" thing it's pretty easily understood.
Development -
(1.5/3) Viability: Looking at the abilities, we have "deal 1 damage" (R), "gain 2 life" (Wg), and "tap target permanent" (Uw). I would've liked to see an ability that was "black".
(1/3) Balance: This card is just slow, for such little payoff. You're paying 5 CMC, and it doesn't come online until the first turn, in which it taps 1 permanent, or gains you two life, or deals 1 damage. This thing doesn't really break even on its return until it's been out at least three turns, which means without ramp you have to last until... turn 9? It would've been better at a lower CMC, or a higher CMC with more damaging abilities. Another option would've been to add symmetry to the abilities. What about "target players draws a card/discards a card", "tap/untap target permanent", "target player gains/loses 2 life", etc etc? This might've been a way to cover all five colors of magic, as I think an epic "scepter of ages" should. (Discard/draw a card is UB for instance, and gain life/lose life would cover Wg/B). Much like how Etherwrought Page covers the three colors. I know that's slightly different since it actually contains those colors, but if you're giving me an epic scepter that absorbs spells... it has to feel epic to me. Another option to explore would've focused on the "absorbing" spells bit, where maybe this spell could exile cards to cast with it similar to Isochron Scepter. Finally, being legendary hurts it as duplicates are useless. Not sure what playgroup would use this card, besides maybe some sort of mono U proliferate EDH deck... and that's a stretch.
Creativity -
(2/3) Uniqueness: We've seen cards that do modals before, but not many artifacts.
(2.5/3) Flavor: I like the idea behind the card. Scepter of Ages sounds pretty nice.
Polish -
(3/3) Quality: Points deducted for incorrect spelling, grammar, and templating.
(2/2) *Main Challenge: Was the main challenge satisfied? Was it approached in a unique or interesting way? Does the card fit the intent of the challenge?
(2/2) Subchallenges: One point awarded per satisfied subchallenge condition.
Total: 18/25
Club Flamingo Wins: 1!
Club Flamingo Wins: 1!
I just realized, I would have to drop the "or less" from the card along with adding X can't be zero. Not that anybody cares.
I guess the flavor is a miss if you didn't judge my other cards. They all tie together (as in, they'd be in the same set).
I was trying to go for tutor meets reverse Gifts Ungiven in a sense. Guess it was a miss. I was tempted to make it cost 4 but felt that it was too strong. I don't think getting full points for flavor lets me advance, however, but I suppose a few more couldn't hurt.
For what it counts, I understood the flavor just fine and I didn't even think of looking at your cards from previous rounds. I didn't remember them as I was writing my judgment for this round's card of yours, I still don't remember them (I would have to go relook at them) and I had to go look at the Excel file I use for judging to see that I judged both of them myself. I also don't think your card for this round was a miss at all, even though this is just my opinion of course. It would certainly have been too strong at four mana and I'm glad you didn't go with that. Please read the note I've added at the top of my judgment post, as it's particularly addressed to you. By the way, those judgments are now complete and hopefully final.
MCC - Winner (6): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019 || Host (15): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here) || Judge (34): 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 one here)
CCL - Winner (3): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last one here) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016
DCC - Winner (1): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar) || Host (3): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016
• The two public custom sets I've been part a part of the design team for:
"Brotherhood of Ormos" - Blog post with all info - set thread - design skeleton / card list || "Extinctia: Homo Evanuit" - Blog post with all info - set thread - card list spreadsheet
• "The Lion's Lair", my article series about MTG and custom card design in particular. Latest article here. Here is the article index. Rather outdated by now, and based on the old MCC rubric, but I'm leaving this here for anybody that might be interested anyway.
• My only public attempt at being a writer: the story of my Leonin custom planeswalker Jeff Lionheart. (I have a very big one that I'm working on right now but that's private for now, and I don't know if I will ever actually publish it, and I also have ideas for multiple future ones, including one where I'm going to reprise Jeff.)
Round 4 is up.