MTG Salvation

Just a shout-out reminder to Doomfish and Blydden that y'all have about 4 hours to post or finalize judgements for Round 1 of the Feb MCC.

Thanks!

Main challenge: design a creature card that represent you.

Creativity -
(0/3) Flavor: No offense, but this card is empty of flavor. Nothing about this card is Kaladeshi. This card name is bland, the flavor text is uninteresting, and the mechanics have this card have nothing to do with either flavor component, unfortunately.

Well, I'm definitely not a hero of Kaladesh

Sorry for the delay. Judgements are in now. I'll make sure I schedule things better for the rest of the month.

Round 2 is up.

Oh darn, I am about to be humbled by Bravelion's judgments for Round 2. I just found 2 glaring mistakes upon reviewing my entry; hopefully it will not affect too much Best of luck to everyone in Round 2 and anyone that makes it to Round 3!

Quote from Folza »

Oh darn, I am about to be humbled by Bravelion's judgments for Round 2. I just found 2 glaring mistakes upon reviewing my entry; hopefully it will not affect too much Best of luck to everyone in Round 2 and anyone that makes it to Round 3!

I just generated the brackets and copied my own cards for now, I didn't even look seriously at them yet, so I don't know yet if and how much I will "humble" you. I'll see what I can find in terms of mistakes...

Quote from bravelion83 »

Development
(2.5/3) Viability - Usually red gives more power than toughness, and I remember a recent question on Blogatog about Brute Force where Maro says that +N/+N with both numbers being the same is a bend in red. Except for that, everything is in color. I can definitely see something like this at uncommon.

Just recalled that Built to Smash exists in Kaladesh

Quote from bravelion83 »

Polish
(3/3) Quality - Ok, the fact that you're bringing up that you're subject to the non-Latin characters restriction saves you from the 1-point deduction I would have given you due to using hyphens instead of bullet points. But then how could you use the long dash after "choose one or both"? Isn't it a non-Latin character too?

I dunno, because I can copy+paste long dash from magiccards.info but can't do the same with bullet points.

It's done: Judgements

Quote from Raptorchan »

Just recalled that Built to Smash exists in Kaladesh

True, I forgot about that card. Anyway I'll see if I can find the Blogatog question I was referring to. EDIT: Here it is.

I dunno, because I can copy+paste long dash from magiccards.info but can't do the same with bullet points.

That's something I've never heard before. Maybe the long dash somehow doesn't qualify as non-Latin in the forum software, that's the only thing I can possibly think of.

Quote from Tilwin »

Quote from bravelion83 »

(1/3) Uniqueness - The combination of effects has never been done before, but each single part reminds me of a loooot of other cards, too many to list here.

This was fun and you are right; that being said, I find uniqueness is being judged quite subjectively at this point. Some people appreciate original interactions while others demand truly unique individual components to a card (which risks affecting on the "familiarity" part of effects being somehow connected to how connected they are with the rest of the game).

I am definitely in the latter camp, as I am sure everyone has noticed by now, but in my opinion that's not a problem as long as every judge judges all the cards in their bracket in the same way.

Battle at the Bridge (which gives us the precedent of "Improvise X spells are ok").

This is why I said I should have forbidden X for subchallenge 2. It just made that subchallenge too easy, way easier than I intented it to be. In fact, half of the submissions in the whole round were X spells... well, I made a mistake as host and you all players took advantage of that. Only fair.

I'm glad you noticed something I oscillated a lot on - the lack of "or less" on the card. I specifically wanted to avoid big blaze effects exploding on the opponent simply because that player has a random permanent on the board...

It was the first thing I noticed reading the card, and one of those I also thought about the most while judging. Avoiding big blasts to the opponent's face is a very good reason for that, and I think I like the card more without "or less" for exactly that reason. So in the end we agree on everything except maybe Uniqueness, that's not a bad score on my part! It's always nice to hear the thought process behind a card anyway.

Quote from doomfish »

It's done: Judgements

Thanks for the positive critique. I think you may have been a bit too literal about the flavor of "artificial intelligence". I was thinking artifact, artificer, artifice, artificial... but even if you wound up agreeing with me, the extra point wouldn't put me into the next round so, eh. But again, thanks. I thought you were dead on in the other categories. I honestly didn't even care for the card but was having a creative block for WU.

Quote from StonerOfKruphix »

I personally would've gone with cmc 4 or less forbidding X spells, there is a lot of juicy design space there.

Yes, that would have also been a good choice.

As soon as Blydden's judgments are in, I'll post round 3. EDIT: Here it is.

I understand judgement can be varied. While I agree with some of the comments of my card, I disagree with other parts, and the comments seem to be inconsistent with each other.

My card was called, and paraphrasing from the comments linked above, "unwieldy to build around", and 'a stretch...to gamebreak...consistently'. I can see how this could be too inconsistent of a card to be reliably strong, and would require a build around to be useful (not unlike a lot of rares we see.)

But then under balance he notes there are cards like griptide which can make this card easily breakable. Next I won't be able to create something like Sun Titan, because Unburial Rites exists. I find cards that rely on multiple cards (especially those that costs 4+ as an example), not exactly unbalanced. This is my strongest criticism of the judging, which is in itself is knocking me in multiple areas for conflicting advice. Is the card inconsistent and not able to be built around, or is it easy breakable by griptide of all cards? I get knocked in appeal because it is too inconsistent and lacks consistent ability to game-break, and in balance it is too powerful and easy to manipulate! No advice is offered to remedy this apparent contradiction.


The rarity posted is rare, the judge says mythic....not sure. The effect is inconsistent as mentioned, and as the judge mentions, is basically a weaker True-Name Nemesis, a rare. Also it is much more limiting in the cards (card) it can grab like villainous wealth. While I disagree that it needs to be mythic, I can see an argument for Mythic.

Any format, sanctioned or otherwise, which is slow enough for such an effect to be reliably playable could potentially suffer due to the existence of this card were it to be official. I apologize.

So a format where this card to be actually a good card, would be too good? Basically this implies this is a casual card, because it is inconsistent and only occasionally effective, but given enough time and luck could be VERY good. It sounds like I am getting knocked for not making something strong enough for standard, modern or legacy, but something that might be just a little too good for casual.

Regarding uniqueness, he mentions if feels like a mix of multiple cards and abilities, but 'despite' this 'looks unique when blended together'. Somewhat harsh, but I got the highest score from the judge for uniqueness, so if one can take their coffee without sugar and cream, it will work.


The rules text re-write offered might be better, I take that as fair criticism.

The protection point is debatable for sure. It is one thing to give a creature protection, its another thing to give Emrakul protection. I think there is a big playbility cliff between Petrified Wood-Kin and Emrakul, the Promised End. Wizards nowadays might print more risky cards anyways with their ban-hammer being more active and under a different schedule (as they have noted.)

The judge, then notes in the review after mine:

Final thought(s): I like simple cards such as these. They tend to score well, and are not too terribly time-consuming to judge!

I see now. One can't help feel a bit slighted because a judge put out his reviews many hours after they were due, and consequentially the easy and predictable cards get the quick good score. Message sent.

Forgive my rambling, but I find this judging inconsistent and rushed. I have gotten reviews in the past, and have always taken the comments to learn from. This time, I just feel there was some inconsistent comments within my own judging, and leaves me in a position unable to learn from (except hope not to get a particular judge.)

Anyone interested in running the March MCC?

Rare = high complexity, high power, unusual effect, legendary, not supposed to show up in large quantities in limited
becomes "upgraded" to Mythic when: Planeswalker, super splashy card, not supposed to show up in limited

(Pick one or more.)

Quote from doomfish »

Rare = high complexity, high power, unusual effect, legendary, not supposed to show up in large quantities in limited
becomes "upgraded" to Mythic when: Planeswalker, super splashy card, not supposed to show up in limited

(Pick one or more.)

Or sometimes, less concretely, if it's a "story important" legendary.

Still looking for someone to run the March MCC.

Judgement it in.

I'm honestly not looking forward to it, but as I've done it before, rather than let the contest die I'll do March too. If anyone else is interested, I'm more than willing to let them do it. This would also be true for the CCL but I really can't do both at the same time for lack of time (mainly) and ideas (also).

Due to my work schedule, my every afternoon and evening is free for the indefinite time being, and certainly for all of March. Therefore... I would like to offer my services in hosting both the MCC and CCL!

Quote from void_nothing »

Due to my work schedule, my every afternoon and evening is free for the indefinite time being, and certainly for all of March. Therefore... I would like to offer my services in hosting both the MCC and CCL!

All yours, void.

Yey, winter (cries in tropical) huhuhu

Ill still try though

The March MCC needs judges! Please sign up here.

Quote from Harbinger »

Undead Sled Team 1BB
Snow Creature - Zombie Hound (U)
Undead Sled Team gets +1/+1 and has haste as long as you control 2 or more Snow permanents.
"A tireless team to traverse the tundra? Sign me up!"
2/2

Quote from Flatline »

Winter Wonderland
Snow Land (R)
: Add to your mana pool one mana of any type that a snow permanent you control could produce.

Doesn't meet main challenge. Must be sorcery or enchantment. You're welcome.

Thanks Legend! I would like to think I would have caught that myself at some point, but these days I'm not so sure.