From how I understand it, you are indeed incorrect. We use existing creature subtypes but we choose a type that doesn't already have existing support cards. (Or very few support cards within reason.)
This is correct. With my wording however, I did say never so if you use a subtype that has had support before and I was judging, I wouldnt give it a top 3 score even if it's use before was minamal. But that's just me. You as individual judges of each other are free to interpret where you draw the line.
This is correct. With my wording however, I did say never so if you use a subtype that has had support before and I was judging, I wouldnt give it a top 3 score even if it's use before was minamal. But that's just me. You as individual judges of each other are free to interpret where you draw the line.
A related question that I for sure should have asked already is: Does the tribe have to have never received support from a noncreature card since that is what we're making? I wondered that from the start. It's fascinating how such a seemingly simple prompt can have so much room for misunderstandings
The tribe your card is supporting should never have received a support card before regardless of whether that support was a creature card or noncreature card.
@IcariiFA...Are noncreature spells that can turn into creatures considered ok for the round 1 challenge?
There are a few people that have posted a creature card for round 1, even though the challenge calls for a noncreature card. If you're one of those people, you might want to correct that.
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)
@IcariiFA...Are noncreature spells that can turn into creatures considered ok for the round 1 challenge?
There are a few people that have posted a creature card for round 1, even though the challenge calls for a noncreature card. If you're one of those people, you might want to correct that.
Noncreature spells that turn into creatures are fine. Thinking of it as this: If I was searching my library for a creature card, would it be a legal target? If the answer is yes, your card falls the challenge. If the answer is no, you're fine.
However, there are a number of illegal entries, so I'll post a... friendly reminder in thread.
I probably should have asked this earlier, but does my card count as having a new "mechanic"? According to MTG Wiki, "A mechanic is a card ability that can be used on multiple cards. The word mechanic has no meaning in the Comprehensive Rules, it's merely a design concept". With that in mind, I assume my card passes the challenge, but I just want to make sure people aren't going to fail me for not coming up with a keyword or ability word. Here's my card for reference....
Homing Beacon2
Artifact — Equipment Implant (U) (This Equipment can be equipped to creatures your opponents control. You still control it when it's equipped to a creature an opponent controls.)
Whenever equipped creature attacks, create a 1/1 colorless Drone artifact creature token with flying.
Equip 1W "I might be crazy, but I'm pretty sure that drone has been following me."
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 was confused about your use of italics for rules text on your Nicol Bolas card as well. Is that legit?
Is this question in reference to my finals entry?
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 was confused about your use of italics for rules text on your Nicol Bolas card as well. Is that legit?
Is this question in reference to my finals entry?
It's the same rules issue isn't it? Both the Nicol Bolas card and the Implant card are using italics (reminder?) text for rules text. I don't know if it's legit or not to do that according to the rules. I'm more okay with the Implant one doing that, but I don't know why I feel that way. Perhaps because "Implant" as a "type" can have intrinsic meaning? Hopefully someone else comments on it because I really don't know.
Huh. It never even occurred to me that it could be a problem. On the Nicol Bolas Card, it's reminder text for the fateful moment ability. I don't really see why that's much different from the meld ability. Cards like Bruna, the Fading Light had a similar thing going on. Implant is a mechanic from Brotherhood of Ormos, the set I worked on with several other people. Nobody that ever commented on the set seemed to think it was a problem. I'm no rules guru myself though.
Edit: Also, I'm of the mind that Wizards can do anything as long as it's cool and it works. They change rules because of new mechanics rather frequently.
Edit 2: It is possible that Implant doesn't need to be a card type, but instead a new keyword on found on equipment that works the same as equip, but allows for you to attach it to a creature you don't control. That's actually not a bad idea. That's one of the reasons I wanted to post the ability, it's been a while since I've thought about it or discussed it.
(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)
The previous month's host should PM you a list of the voters. At least that's how it worked when I hosted.
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)
Quite a few people where kicked out/lost points for lack of top three and/or critiques.
Each round was scored independently, then averaged together.
There was one round of critiques where one critiqued the wrong individuals. While I gave them credit for doing crits/top 3 to avoid disqualification, I did not count whom they would of awarded points to.
Quite a few people where kicked out/lost points for lack of top three and/or critiques.
...
There was one round of critiques where one critiqued the wrong individuals. While I gave them credit for doing crits/top 3 to avoid disqualification, I did not count whom they would of awarded points to.
Always always always: Critique or at least leave a top 3; and make sure you're doing it in the correct direction. If you're playing in the CCL you have to be mindful of this stuff to succeed!
I'm glad I posted an implant in the second round. It's an older idea of mine, and I had another, newer idea, but I had never posted implant in a contest that forced others to evaluate the ability. I've gotta say, I got a lot out of it. I agree that implant would be better as an activated ability instead of a new card type. If we ever revisit the set it comes from (Brotherhood of Ormos), I will suggest the change. So my round 2 entry would look like this....
Homing Beacon2
Artifact — Equipment (U)
Whenever implanted creature attacks, create a 1/1 colorless Drone artifact creature token with flying.
Implant 1W(1W: Attach to target creature. You still control it when it's implanted in a creature an opponent controls. Implant only as a sorcery.) "I might be crazy, but I'm pretty sure that drone has been following me."
What do people think of this? I'm wondering if maybe I should keep implant as new type. I could either make it a subtype for equipment, a new artifact type in place of equipment. It's probably best to leave it as I have it in the spoiler though. Equipment already comes with its own well known set of rules, which is helpful.
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)
@Flatline: I like keeping the type line. It's more immersive that way. As I said in my feedback of Ormos as a whole - the implants need to do something other than de facto pacify enemy creatures if they're going to be fun. They read better than I imagine them playing. I think there are ways to implement them, but you're going to have to get really creative and whacky, and I would limit the number of them so you can make all of them a homerun.
I do worry about them being equipment instead of auras.
@IcariiFA: these counters for the next round..need they be "essential" counters and not "nominal" counters? Id est, need they be similar to +1/+1, -1/-1, time, poison, and loyalty counters, or can they be something that depends more heavily on stated rules text on the card like Spore counters,divinity counters, and prey counters?
Another way to ask the question is: "Are we designing a new type of counter that has wide application, or are we designing a new type of counter that is more card-specific in its utility?"
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Follow me on Twitch if you're interested in watching competitive league drafts.
Play MTGO? Check out my latest MTGO finance articles on Quiet Speculation.
@IcariiFA: these counters for the next round..need they be "essential" counters and not "nominal" counters? Id est, need they be similar to +1/+1, -1/-1, time, poison, and loyalty counters, or can they be something that depends more heavily on stated rules text on the card like Spore counters,divinity counters, and prey counters?
Another way to ask the question is: "Are we designing a new type of counter that has wide application, or are we designing a new type of counter that is more card-specific in its utility?"
Interpret as you will. All I asked was for a new type counter.
Interpret as you will. All I asked was for a new type counter.
Your feedback from the last round of the MCC made me realize that Scaled would work best if it read "A creature with scaled enters the battlefield with a scale counter. If a creature with a scale counter would leave the battlefield, it loses a scale counter instead." That would address the tracking issues. I had been conceiving of Scaled as a sort of backwards Monstrosity from Theros. If we had been tasked with finishing the cycle, my goal would have been to make the rare cycle of Garadon beasts all have Scaled.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Follow me on Twitch if you're interested in watching competitive league drafts.
Play MTGO? Check out my latest MTGO finance articles on Quiet Speculation.
I am not sure what would make this part of a miserable limited, but tbh I hate limited because you can't build constructed-quality decks in it and I always feel like I'm playing babby magic so I don't especially design for it. Panoply is designed to make Auras and Equipment more valuable by making them hit much harder, and to create that dream of building your own Emrakul.
I think two of us had this problem with Panoply. It's hard to explain why it is so awful if you don't play any Limited, but basically "build your own Emrakul" is usually a really bad strategy in limited, for 2 reasons. (1) Unless all of your creatures have hexproof (which a good format should NOT allow because good formats are interactive formats, just like good games of Magic are interactive games of Magic), your precious 3-card 8/8 lifelink flying is going to die to a 1-card removal or bounce spell. That is really frustrating for the player whose creature gets killed or bounced, and if no such removal spell manifests itself then your opponent had a bad experience since he was essentially helpless. Put simply, these sorts of games rarely will be ones in which both players had fun and in which both players felt that they had agency over the game. (2) There simply aren't enough slots in a deck to have more than a few auras. If you're jamming 4-6 auras in your deck to enable your Panoply creatures, then you're not going to be able to interact with your opponent's side of the board unless you really cut down on your creature count. This would lead to an uneven, "goldfishing" experience, one in which you are basically ignoring your opponent.
I could possibly envision Panoply going in a set with Bestow, or in a set with the "Arm" mechanic I came up with for this round, but I don't think it would be kindly looked upon by the majority of players. As you say, perhaps in Commander or something, although would anyone want to play a Panoply creature in Constructed unless that creature also had hexproof?
EDIT: I should add that two Limited formats with aura subthemes are Theros and Vintage Masters. Both of those are good examples for all of us to look to when designing aura-related mechanics and planning environments in which auras will feature a more prominent part than usual. I had the pleasure of playing Vintage Masters over Christmas, and it was easily my favorite Limited format of all time (even you would like this one Willows). I'll attach an image of my favorite deck that I built from it.
TheDrB: I’m honestly not sure why this uses a tracking counter instead of a static ability that checks if you control a walker right now. Can you walk me through the thought process?
Faithful Acolyte - W
Creature - Human Cleric (Rare)
When Faithful Acolyte enters the battlefield, if you control a Planeswalker, put a morale counter on faithful acolyte.
If Faithful Acolyte has a morale counter on it, it gets +2/+0 and has first strike.
2/1 Inspiration can be the most powerful force in the multiverse.
Thanks for the question. For this idea, my thought was about the moment of inspiration vs a continuous influence. When considering it, it felt like you could push the advantages much further with the counter and still be reasonable.
This is correct. With my wording however, I did say never so if you use a subtype that has had support before and I was judging, I wouldnt give it a top 3 score even if it's use before was minamal. But that's just me. You as individual judges of each other are free to interpret where you draw the line.
A related question that I for sure should have asked already is: Does the tribe have to have never received support from a noncreature card since that is what we're making? I wondered that from the start. It's fascinating how such a seemingly simple prompt can have so much room for misunderstandings
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
There are a few people that have posted a creature card for round 1, even though the challenge calls for a noncreature card. If you're one of those people, you might want to correct that.
However, there are a number of illegal entries, so I'll post a... friendly reminder in thread.
Artifact — Equipment Implant (U)
(This Equipment can be equipped to creatures your opponents control. You still control it when it's equipped to a creature an opponent controls.)
Whenever equipped creature attacks, create a 1/1 colorless Drone artifact creature token with flying.
Equip 1W
"I might be crazy, but I'm pretty sure that drone has been following me."
It's the same rules issue isn't it? Both the Nicol Bolas card and the Implant card are using italics (reminder?) text for rules text. I don't know if it's legit or not to do that according to the rules. I'm more okay with the Implant one doing that, but I don't know why I feel that way. Perhaps because "Implant" as a "type" can have intrinsic meaning? Hopefully someone else comments on it because I really don't know.
Edit: Also, I'm of the mind that Wizards can do anything as long as it's cool and it works. They change rules because of new mechanics rather frequently.
Edit 2: It is possible that Implant doesn't need to be a card type, but instead a new keyword on found on equipment that works the same as equip, but allows for you to attach it to a creature you don't control. That's actually not a bad idea. That's one of the reasons I wanted to post the ability, it's been a while since I've thought about it or discussed it.
kjsharp
void_nothing
willows
Flatline
Hemlock
Sheoldred
TheDrB
Antiantiserum
Scoring Notes:
Always always always: Critique or at least leave a top 3; and make sure you're doing it in the correct direction. If you're playing in the CCL you have to be mindful of this stuff to succeed!
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
Artifact — Equipment (U)
Whenever implanted creature attacks, create a 1/1 colorless Drone artifact creature token with flying.
Implant 1W (1W: Attach to target creature. You still control it when it's implanted in a creature an opponent controls. Implant only as a sorcery.)
"I might be crazy, but I'm pretty sure that drone has been following me."
I do worry about them being equipment instead of auras.
@IcariiFA: these counters for the next round..need they be "essential" counters and not "nominal" counters? Id est, need they be similar to +1/+1, -1/-1, time, poison, and loyalty counters, or can they be something that depends more heavily on stated rules text on the card like Spore counters,divinity counters, and prey counters?
Another way to ask the question is: "Are we designing a new type of counter that has wide application, or are we designing a new type of counter that is more card-specific in its utility?"
Interpret as you will. All I asked was for a new type counter.
Your feedback from the last round of the MCC made me realize that Scaled would work best if it read "A creature with scaled enters the battlefield with a scale counter. If a creature with a scale counter would leave the battlefield, it loses a scale counter instead." That would address the tracking issues. I had been conceiving of Scaled as a sort of backwards Monstrosity from Theros. If we had been tasked with finishing the cycle, my goal would have been to make the rare cycle of Garadon beasts all have Scaled.
I think two of us had this problem with Panoply. It's hard to explain why it is so awful if you don't play any Limited, but basically "build your own Emrakul" is usually a really bad strategy in limited, for 2 reasons. (1) Unless all of your creatures have hexproof (which a good format should NOT allow because good formats are interactive formats, just like good games of Magic are interactive games of Magic), your precious 3-card 8/8 lifelink flying is going to die to a 1-card removal or bounce spell. That is really frustrating for the player whose creature gets killed or bounced, and if no such removal spell manifests itself then your opponent had a bad experience since he was essentially helpless. Put simply, these sorts of games rarely will be ones in which both players had fun and in which both players felt that they had agency over the game. (2) There simply aren't enough slots in a deck to have more than a few auras. If you're jamming 4-6 auras in your deck to enable your Panoply creatures, then you're not going to be able to interact with your opponent's side of the board unless you really cut down on your creature count. This would lead to an uneven, "goldfishing" experience, one in which you are basically ignoring your opponent.
I could possibly envision Panoply going in a set with Bestow, or in a set with the "Arm" mechanic I came up with for this round, but I don't think it would be kindly looked upon by the majority of players. As you say, perhaps in Commander or something, although would anyone want to play a Panoply creature in Constructed unless that creature also had hexproof?
Ultra-Slippery Bogle 1UG
Creature - Bogle
Hexproof, Panoply
1/1
That's probably fair for Constructed, eh?
EDIT: I should add that two Limited formats with aura subthemes are Theros and Vintage Masters. Both of those are good examples for all of us to look to when designing aura-related mechanics and planning environments in which auras will feature a more prominent part than usual. I had the pleasure of playing Vintage Masters over Christmas, and it was easily my favorite Limited format of all time (even you would like this one Willows). I'll attach an image of my favorite deck that I built from it.
Creature - Human Cleric (Rare)
When Faithful Acolyte enters the battlefield, if you control a Planeswalker, put a morale counter on faithful acolyte.
If Faithful Acolyte has a morale counter on it, it gets +2/+0 and has first strike.
2/1
Inspiration can be the most powerful force in the multiverse.
Thanks for the question. For this idea, my thought was about the moment of inspiration vs a continuous influence. When considering it, it felt like you could push the advantages much further with the counter and still be reasonable.
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝