Does it means that Dark Ritual doesn't count so much on the judgings?
In my opinion, no, seeing as Dark Ritual is Legacy and Vintage legal. The idea is to treat each card as though they're Standard-legal, which in turn, makes it legal in all other constructed formats.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
Wow.. um.. a lot of (by a lot I mean 2) people have made a similar effect to my card. While different enough to be different, I just wanted to point out that my card was the first posted to mention 'can't be countered by abilities.'
[edit]Judgings altered. TheFooFish, you're still not going to round 2, but you're at least a little closer.
M_E, if you want me to redo my judgings as if the Avatar were in standard, rather than having the cards printed in Urza, let me know.[/edit]
Serra Avatar isn't Standard-legal. Nothing will change that unless it gets reprinted (it's not on the reserved list.) You only have to treat the cards you're judging as Standard-legal.
As for who's left, Nemcon has two left to do, Fernin a few more and Absolutionis hasn't posted yet. I'm hoping they'll get it done asap.
Serra Avatar isn't Standard-legal. Nothing will change that unless it gets reprinted (it's not on the reserved list.) You only have to treat the cards you're judging as Standard-legal.
As for who's left, Nemcon has two left to do, Fernin a few more and Absolutionis hasn't posted yet. I'm hoping they'll get it done asap.
Well, I was considering them in Standard. Granted, a significantly older Standard, but still...
"Whenever" (and the other two trigger words) in Magic means "Looking at the past, did something happen?" Triggered abilities are checked each time a player would receive priority.
"Would" in Magic means "Looking forward, will something happen?" -- it is *only* used as part of replacement; either replacement effects or altering how an effect will be applied.
Equinox shows why. Looking forward is generally very dangerous rules-wise. And looking forward and looking back at the same time is... bad. It either completely fails, or it triggers over and over and over until the condition ("would deal combat damage") is no longer true -- and that condition will always be true while combat damage assignments are on the stack. Oops, game's a draw.
So "whenever ... would" is a construction that should never be found on a Magic card, and making such in the FCC is nothing but a design mistake. At least Cantrip's mistake isn't as bad as "Whenever something would do foo, do bar instead." That mistake makes me want to break things.
"Sufficiently advanced experience is indistinguishable from clairvoyance." -Carsten
"Ah those eyes, those horrible creepy eyes!" -Chaosof99
DCI Level 3 Judge & TO "I do not consider myself a hero. I know only what the Vec teach:
justice must always be served and corruption must always be opposed."
Go read! I am one of the three authors of Cranial Insertion.
But seriously, if you can't remember "Woapalanne", just call me Eli.
Just gonna jump in here and say that this round is.. difficult, to say the least. Making a card specifically made to hose one card while not being so good that it hoses an entire set of cards is a bit of a stretch for a field this big.
Either way, I'm pretty sure Absolutionis isn't about to change his tune.
Agreed. I made my card specifically to hose the given card in a flavorfully and mechanically creative way. I didn't design it with much else in mind beyond "Is this horribly broken with anything?" Mine actually was with Multani's Presence, but I got slammed hard for the card being essentially useless otherwise. Smells like ass. Ah, well, whatev.
Just gonna jump in here and say that this round is.. difficult, to say the least. Making a card specifically made to hose one card while not being so good that it hoses an entire set of cards is a bit of a stretch for a field this big.
Either way, I'm pretty sure Absolutionis isn't about to change his tune.
M_E, please don't ever make a round like this again.
This was a very hard round to both play in and to judge for. I think if a round like this exists again, it shouldn't be until the third or fourth rounds, and it should have more clearly stated official criteria on judging. For example, how important is it that the card stands on its own without the 'hosed' card? What format are we considering? I assumed it would be current standard despite the fact that the 'hosed' cards were from all around, and it turns out this was also M_E's intent, but others had different ideas on this, therefore drastically affecting both card creation and scoring.
Just gonna jump in here and say that this round is.. difficult, to say the least. Making a card specifically made to hose one card while not being so good that it hoses an entire set of cards is a bit of a stretch for a field this big.
Either way, I'm pretty sure Absolutionis isn't about to change his tune.
I sympathize with your concerns as to the results to this round. The round requirements were to make a card that does A. Your card does exactly that. It's just that it doesn't do anything beyond A.
When judging balance, what is expected of the judge in this round? I confess that it was an annoying round for both the judges and players, and as a judge's interpretations of the contest, the "balance" score was balance on a grand scale. Your card must fit the round requirement to actually qualify altogether. Your card must be useful overall to get a high balance score.
It seems contradictory, but other contestants have successfully made cards that work exceptionally well on their given card and quite decently otherwise. Your card fits the requirements just fine. Your card is a pure deathblow to Nether Void. It's just unplayable otherwise.
Again, I apologize.
If you have any concerns in specific aside from the interpretation of the round, please tell. If you wish to get a second opinion on the matter from a higher authority, I will yield.
Agreed. I made my card specifically to hose the given card in a flavorfully and mechanically creative way. I didn't design it with much else in mind beyond "Is this horribly broken with anything?" Mine actually was with Multani's Presence, but I got slammed hard for the card being essentially useless otherwise. Smells like ass. Ah, well, whatev.
The same case as above, only your card happened to combo exceptionally with a single card. In every other case, your card had nearly no net effect. Of all the 9000+ cards to ever exist in Magic, your card comboes well with only two and is completely null otherwise.
I just want to make a quick comment about the Techno v. FooFish issue. As M_E has said, and as I though I made fairly clear earlier, the interpretation of "hoser" should have been very broad. I agree that FooFish should not have been deducted for failing to meet the round requirement. However, I also agree with Techno's assesment on how effective the card is.
But more than anything, I'm rather disppointed with the amount of venom FooFish has slung at Techno during this.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The Golden Rule of forums: If you're going to be rude, be right. If you might be wrong, be polite.
This was a very hard round to both play in and to judge for. I think if a round like this exists again, it shouldn't be until the third or fourth rounds, and it should have more clearly stated official criteria on judging. For example, how important is it that the card stands on its own without the 'hosed' card? What format are we considering? I assumed it would be current standard despite the fact that the 'hosed' cards were from all around, and it turns out this was also M_E's intent, but others had different ideas on this, therefore drastically affecting both card creation and scoring.
~
Not too make it sound harsh. But I can't imagine why M_E would want a card that's very effective at hosing a specific card and effectively does nothing else. Making such card is obviously a poor design. His intent was very clear from the beginning.
Okay, I think I've waited long enough on this. I PM'd Darkfire as requested regarding his judging, a couple of days ago. I haven't heard anything back yet.
I'd like to see opinions from other judges on *all* of the cards in the Tarmogoyf group, not just my own card. I was extremely disappointed with the comments Darkfire left, and not just because of his comments on my card. Honestly, I felt this way after reading the comments when he only had the first two cards finished. The depth of analysis and insight that I saw from other judges was completely lacking here - considerations of Legendary supertypes, specific comments about costs, suggestions about changes or corrections in wording. Of the cards that won, not a single one of them had more than 4 sentences written about it, and there really wasn't any substance to those comments. Technomagus was brief, but his brevity was generally packed with insight.
On my own card, yeah, I'm pretty disappointed there, too. Three sentences, two of which are about the quality of the art. *No* display of insight into the *flavor* of the art, the effectiveness of the card (he said "Seems weak", but it is an effective sideboard against many of the current finishers in Standard, and even has the potential to be built around), the absolute uniqueness of the way I addressed the hosing issue, or recognizing that it was templated perfectly (at least, as far as I can tell for an ability that's never had anything like it printed before).
I also think he missed some key flaws with other cards. I'm not going to go into details here, but in my PM to Darkfire, I easily doubled the comments about every single card in the group. (Actually, this made me consider whether or not I should be judging instead of creating cards. ).
This really seems to me like Darkfire got through the first two cards, then decided he didn't really want judge so he rushed through the rest. I can't imagine anyone in our group felt like they got a good sense about what was good or bad about their card. I know our group won't be able to get an "official" rejudging from someone else, but I'd really be interested in comments from someone that seems like they actually care.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
This is our last dance, this is ourselves under pressure.
@Vishara: Even though I didn't judge that round, I hope my opinion counts.
I looked at darkfire's judgings and it certainly looked like he rushed through it. I also took a long look at the cards he judged. If I judged these cards, the top 4 would not have changed.
Anyway, I'm going to PM darkfire, asking him to put more thought in his comments. And now that all the judges have finished, I declare round 1 closed. Round 2 will be put up soon.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
I sympathize with your concerns as to the results to this round. The round requirements were to make a card that does A. Your card does exactly that. It's just that it doesn't do anything beyond A.
Interesting. I agree about the round. It was very fun making a card for it, but in fact I was penalized for making a card that does do something beyond hosing the card A.
My card read "creatures with haste, trample, frenzy, first strike, or double strike have defender instead." was criticized for, "Something quite new, but I don't like this as a direct hoser of Sneak Attack."
It would help to have a few more guidlines or more leeway in judging.
The other areas I lost points, seemed more subjective, and difficult to argue beyond a matter of taste. Yet, it is also a little depressing to get an equal card quality score to passing card with: "Whenever a player sacrifices a creature her or she loses life equal to its toughness."
In my opinion, no, seeing as Dark Ritual is Legacy and Vintage legal. The idea is to treat each card as though they're Standard-legal, which in turn, makes it legal in all other constructed formats.
So.. yeah
Good to be back in the FCC thing.
Like freeform roleplaying? Try Darkness Befalls Us
Ryttare Kelasin Luna Orelinalei
Record: 3-2
Simpsons Mafia (Newbie) - Vanilla Mafia - Win
The Fiasco Corporation - Town Reporter - Loss
Doomsday Mafia - Mafia Roleblocker - Win
Battle Royale Mafia - Serial Daykiller - Loss
Danger City Mafia - Vanilla Town - Win
Thanks. Though, I was never, at any point, expecting you to advance me. I knew I didn't stand a chance when I saw my judge assignment.
Serra Avatar isn't Standard-legal. Nothing will change that unless it gets reprinted (it's not on the reserved list.) You only have to treat the cards you're judging as Standard-legal.
As for who's left, Nemcon has two left to do, Fernin a few more and Absolutionis hasn't posted yet. I'm hoping they'll get it done asap.
I think Absolutionis does his judging offline first in Notepad, then dumps them in a post all at once. It's not unusual for him to post last, IIRC.
I'm here, don't worry.
Well, I was considering them in Standard. Granted, a significantly older Standard, but still...
My Custom Cards
My Twitch - Languishing in neglect under the vain hope of starting again
My Livestream Archive
"Would" in Magic means "Looking forward, will something happen?" -- it is *only* used as part of replacement; either replacement effects or altering how an effect will be applied.
Equinox shows why. Looking forward is generally very dangerous rules-wise. And looking forward and looking back at the same time is... bad. It either completely fails, or it triggers over and over and over until the condition ("would deal combat damage") is no longer true -- and that condition will always be true while combat damage assignments are on the stack. Oops, game's a draw.
So "whenever ... would" is a construction that should never be found on a Magic card, and making such in the FCC is nothing but a design mistake. At least Cantrip's mistake isn't as bad as "Whenever something would do foo, do bar instead." That mistake makes me want to break things.
"Sufficiently advanced experience is indistinguishable from clairvoyance." -Carsten
"Ah those eyes, those horrible creepy eyes!" -Chaosof99
DCI Level 3 Judge & TO
"I do not consider myself a hero. I know only what the Vec teach:
justice must always be served and corruption must always be opposed."
Go read! I am one of the three authors of Cranial Insertion.
But seriously, if you can't remember "Woapalanne", just call me Eli.
Very sorry for the wait all, I'll have mine up very shortly.
Retrodrome, your one stop site for everything nostalgic.
Edit : Judgings are finally completed. Sorry for the delay.
Either way, I'm pretty sure Absolutionis isn't about to change his tune.
Have fun this month.
*cough cough*
Like freeform roleplaying? Try Darkness Befalls Us
Ryttare Kelasin Luna Orelinalei
Yea, this was a fun round. I tried to avoid the trap of making a card that was too narrow... and that was bad too. Oh well, whatever.
M_E, please don't ever make a round like this again.
This was a very hard round to both play in and to judge for. I think if a round like this exists again, it shouldn't be until the third or fourth rounds, and it should have more clearly stated official criteria on judging. For example, how important is it that the card stands on its own without the 'hosed' card? What format are we considering? I assumed it would be current standard despite the fact that the 'hosed' cards were from all around, and it turns out this was also M_E's intent, but others had different ideas on this, therefore drastically affecting both card creation and scoring.
~
When judging balance, what is expected of the judge in this round? I confess that it was an annoying round for both the judges and players, and as a judge's interpretations of the contest, the "balance" score was balance on a grand scale. Your card must fit the round requirement to actually qualify altogether. Your card must be useful overall to get a high balance score.
It seems contradictory, but other contestants have successfully made cards that work exceptionally well on their given card and quite decently otherwise. Your card fits the requirements just fine. Your card is a pure deathblow to Nether Void. It's just unplayable otherwise.
Again, I apologize.
If you have any concerns in specific aside from the interpretation of the round, please tell. If you wish to get a second opinion on the matter from a higher authority, I will yield.
The same case as above, only your card happened to combo exceptionally with a single card. In every other case, your card had nearly no net effect. Of all the 9000+ cards to ever exist in Magic, your card comboes well with only two and is completely null otherwise.
Retrodrome, your one stop site for everything nostalgic.
But more than anything, I'm rather disppointed with the amount of venom FooFish has slung at Techno during this.
Current New Favorite Person™: Mallory Archer
She knows why.
Not too make it sound harsh. But I can't imagine why M_E would want a card that's very effective at hosing a specific card and effectively does nothing else. Making such card is obviously a poor design. His intent was very clear from the beginning.
WotC's stance is also very clear, these color hosing cards from Coldsnap are far more elegant than Teferi's Response or Tsabo's Web from way back in the past. Why? Because their range of utility are much, much broader.
Bottom line : This is very similar to other rounds. You fulfill the round requirement, then make an all-around good card based on that.
I'd like to see opinions from other judges on *all* of the cards in the Tarmogoyf group, not just my own card. I was extremely disappointed with the comments Darkfire left, and not just because of his comments on my card. Honestly, I felt this way after reading the comments when he only had the first two cards finished. The depth of analysis and insight that I saw from other judges was completely lacking here - considerations of Legendary supertypes, specific comments about costs, suggestions about changes or corrections in wording. Of the cards that won, not a single one of them had more than 4 sentences written about it, and there really wasn't any substance to those comments. Technomagus was brief, but his brevity was generally packed with insight.
On my own card, yeah, I'm pretty disappointed there, too. Three sentences, two of which are about the quality of the art. *No* display of insight into the *flavor* of the art, the effectiveness of the card (he said "Seems weak", but it is an effective sideboard against many of the current finishers in Standard, and even has the potential to be built around), the absolute uniqueness of the way I addressed the hosing issue, or recognizing that it was templated perfectly (at least, as far as I can tell for an ability that's never had anything like it printed before).
I also think he missed some key flaws with other cards. I'm not going to go into details here, but in my PM to Darkfire, I easily doubled the comments about every single card in the group. (Actually, this made me consider whether or not I should be judging instead of creating cards. ).
This really seems to me like Darkfire got through the first two cards, then decided he didn't really want judge so he rushed through the rest. I can't imagine anyone in our group felt like they got a good sense about what was good or bad about their card. I know our group won't be able to get an "official" rejudging from someone else, but I'd really be interested in comments from someone that seems like they actually care.
I looked at darkfire's judgings and it certainly looked like he rushed through it. I also took a long look at the cards he judged. If I judged these cards, the top 4 would not have changed.
Anyway, I'm going to PM darkfire, asking him to put more thought in his comments. And now that all the judges have finished, I declare round 1 closed. Round 2 will be put up soon.
Interesting. I agree about the round. It was very fun making a card for it, but in fact I was penalized for making a card that does do something beyond hosing the card A.
My card read "creatures with haste, trample, frenzy, first strike, or double strike have defender instead." was criticized for, "Something quite new, but I don't like this as a direct hoser of Sneak Attack."
It would help to have a few more guidlines or more leeway in judging.
The other areas I lost points, seemed more subjective, and difficult to argue beyond a matter of taste. Yet, it is also a little depressing to get an equal card quality score to passing card with: "Whenever a player sacrifices a creature her or she loses life equal to its toughness."
I guess it is just an r...
Nice round, and fun for a first round.
Credit for banner goes to: a passer by
World of Pokemon---------------------------Michael Syne
Magic the RPG-------------------------------Forace
Community Project(Fantasy)-----------------Sammy Matthews
Disegreth-----------------------------------Sussania
The Pen and Paper Inn(Project PlanarChaos)--Valarie Liadon