Sunday, August 11, 2013

The Cure for Community Recognition

I find the rituals and practices of the Magic community fascinating.   It seems like every day, I learn something new.   Whether it's a weird card interaction or a finding out how the Hall of Fame process works, every day is an adventure, every article, Tweet, and game is a new experience.

This often leads me down paths of discovery that I think others don't see.   Or perhaps, I simply find a way to express something others have thought of, but have never moved forward with aside from a conversation with a few of their friends over drinks.   I know I was pretty loud over the increasing attendance problems at tournaments.   I realize that my view about the Hall of Fame vote (see it here) is hopefully correct but likely naive.   I am self-aware, in that my own opinion isn't one that has a lifetime of experience with MtG behind it.

Sometimes though, I have idea that burns with the intensity of a thousand suns.   Something that I MUST share with world.   This is one of those.   I'm positive that this is a direction that the community should move towards.   Execution will be difficult and some stakeholders may fail to see the big picture of the following concept.   That doesn't make this idea without any merit.    I am sure that the community will embrace the concept and overall quality of the play experience will improve as a result - which means it isn't a matter of whether or not to do it.   It's a matter of how.

How We Ended Up Here
The concept I'll share in a few minutes is one that is born of complaints.   Not mine, mind you.   I complain enough sometimes for five people (guilty).   Rather, these are complaints overheard in the dark alleys of Twitter and podcasts.   One complaint was about those who have been writing for five years have no ability to vote in the Hall of Fame process.   Another was a hurried whisper, stating that the MTGO Community Cup was moving in the right direction but wasn't doing enough.

Did the people making these statements envision what I'm going to lay out below?   I would like to think they did.   Or if not, that what I'm going to suggest below is at least in the spirit of what they were talking about.


I think people who contribute to the community should be allowed/invited to help with the HoF process.   And while I've never played MTGO a day in my life - nor do I actually have plans to do so - I get how people feel shut out from that process as well.   Even Sheldon Menery's recent article that touches on one way to improve the Pro Tour Hall of Fame vote has a bit of flavor that helped to shape my current concept.   (Sheldon, where ever you are, thank your idea).


Concept
Ask yourself the following question.   How does the Magic Community recognize those that make worthwhile contributions?   With the limited exception of the MTGO Community Cup and the highly limited exception of the Pro Tour Hall of Fame, it really doesn't.   Yes, occasionally people who have proven themselves as gamers or major contributors but somehow miss the cut due to unusual circumstances are given a special dispensation to attend an event.   But that's not what I'm talking about today.

I'm talking about finding a way to recognize those that contribute to the overall community in a meaningful way.   I'm stating that there are hundreds, if not thousands of people, groups, and small companies that make Magic stronger through their efforts.   I'm positive that there is a method that can easily be adopted, edited, and implemented that would through its existence further support, grow and improve our overall community.

This isn't something that can be set up overnight.   I do have a few thoughts about how to make it happen that I'm going to share.   I hope that this ends up in the right hands, people with the ability and vision to make something like this viable.   Yes, there are games out there that have been around longer (in the modern era, I'm thinking along the lines of Monopoly and Scrabble).   Yet none have the diversity, the support network and the shear mass of community that is demonstrated by those that love and play Magic.   By Hasbro's estimates (according to a recent article), over 12 million people have played the game, and there are over 3 million current players.   Magic is a global phenomenon.   What better way is there to celebrate its twentieth anniversary than to find a new way to celebrate its community?

Award Concept
Create an annual MTG community awards and recognition program.   Working name for the concept is, "Magic the Gathering Awards".   Or, if you prefer, the 'Watcies'.

Organization
As with the Pro Tour Hall of Fame selection committee, there has to be some oversight in the process.   The mothership is the likely top of the organization, but aside from providing some minor support and serving as the head, their role could stop there.   The real workhorses of this program in my mind have to be a fair mix of independent representatives with enough experience in the community and owners/operators of community destination websites.   There should be a minimum of two separate and distinct committees.    The first would have oversight of the award categories.   The second would be in charge of actually selecting candidates (either directly or through some submission process).   There are other committees that could be formed and I'll list them, but this is the core that is required.

      Chair: Wizards of the Coast
              Category Committee
              Selection Committee
              Biography Committee
                  Additional Committees: Awards, Marketing/Promotion, etc.

WotC
Wizards has to be an active partner.   Their level of participation in this would vary depending upon the final model that this program takes.   The bare minimum investment on their part is to offer a secure method of voting so that members of the community may only vote once using their DCI number and planeswalker account.   I think this is a limited investment on their part, one that is relatively easy to program, oversee and validate the final voting.

WotC should chair the process.   Their level of participation beyond setting up the overall design of the process can and possibly should be limited.   They may, as chair, choose the first committees and fill a few seats on each.   After that, I see the real work being done by the members of the committees.

Committees
The various committees have an enormous responsibility.   I think the first time this is done, it will also be time consuming.   This is the hard part of selling this concept.   I envision people like major store and content site owners/managers being the stakeholders.   People like Adam Stybs and Pete Hoefling (or designees) should be directly involved to chair committees.   The committees should all have an odd number of seats and should have between 5 and 9 people on them.   Each committee should have at least one Judge and one Pro Player on them - but after that, they should be filled with people who both understand the history of the game and, more importantly, the community that supports it.   Efforts should be made to include people who have displayed outstanding service to the community in all aspects: online, paper, various formats, judging, writing/artists and more.   No one person should be on a committee that doesn't have a pedigree of at least 5 years with the game.

This isn't something that can be put together overnight - but it's not difficult either.   Given the current grumbling about the HoF process, finding a few talented people to staff a new method of recognizing all levels of Magic should be easy.

Members of committees would serve 2 - 3 years the first time.   Those given awards in the first two years would have a chance to also sit on the committees as people are rotated out, to maintain balance and fresh ideas.

Category Committee
Responsible for designing the list of categories that people, websites, and/or organizations can be nominated to and the rules for entry into a category.   This committee will also determine in future years what changes need to be made to the categories and any support activities.

Selection Committee
Following the rules and categories established by the Category Committee, I see this group as responsible for actually determining a list of initial candidates for each category, based upon a system of submission/voting/nomination.   Some categories are very subjective perhaps should have larger pools that may be voted for, while other are more narrow in focus.

Biography Committee
This committee is critical.   Their job is to develop a way to help everyone understand the contributions individual nominees have made to the game of Magic.   It should be staffed principally by seasoned writers and the chair should be a well recognized and skilled editor to ensure a fair approach is taken to all biographies written.

Categories
The following are ideas only for what areas that I think deserve recognition.   It is a starting point in the conversation - it may be that there are too many categories or that I'm overlooking something important.   The actual category committee would hammer out what the final list looks like, and then they would add or subtract categories as warranted in future years:

Best Alterer
Best Art - Core Set
Best Art - Block 1
Best Art - Block 2
Best Art - Block 3
Best Art - Additional Sets/Products
Best Art - Overall
Best Comic
Best Content Site
Best Coverage Team
Best Game Innovation
Best Game Mechanic
Best New Product (non-WotC)
Best New Product (WotC)
Best On-Air Presenter
Best Podcast
Best Product Site
Best Support Product - Internet
Best Support Product - Physical (open to sleeves, etc.)
Best Support Product - Software/App
Best Tournament Feature Match
Best Tournament Organizer
Best Tumblr Blog
Best Twitter Feed
Best Writer - Overall
Best Writer - Casual
Best Writer - Judge
Best Writer - Format Specific
Best Writer - Fiction/Flavor/Vorthos
Best Writer - Pro
Lifetime Achievement Award - Wizards Employee
Lifetime Achievement Award - Gamer
Lifetime Achievement Award - Community Support
Social Media Maven (See Tumbler/Twitter)
Wildest T8 Deck - Standard
Wildest T8 Deck - Modern

Recognition
This is a topic I'm sure could be debated for the next 10 years.   Let us all set aside our differences and realize a few things that our very important to remember, even now:

1. There is no physical location for the Pro Tour Hall of Fame museum.   There are no busts of players heads in any location in the world.
2. Recognition can be payment in and of itself.   Imagine, being a content site and being able to state, "Home of 2015's Magic Writer of the Year," or even better, "Winner of 4 Magic Awards."   For those who would drag their feet at the work involved in setting up this program, the dividends are clear and valuable.

That said, there are a few different ways to permanently recognize those that make contributions.   Most of them are beyond cost-effective and easy to implement.

WotC should (and must, in my opinion), find a permanent way to recognize members of the Hall of Fame.   While they do have a page for the Hall of Fame on their site, it fails to offer a clear picture of who these players are.   That is easy enough to fix and worth doing.   I envision a page that shows the current year's Hall of Fame players (pictures and brief biographies) with links to previous years.   A visual, permanent online museum is the solution until WotC comes up with a physical alternative (if one is to be made).

This solution, in fact, works for the purposes of the MTGO Community Cup (if it is determined to maintain it) as well as for this concept as well.   If MTGO Community Cup is folded into this concept, there should still be an opportunity for winners of selected categories to play Wizards employees in a mini-tournament.  Other awards are possible as well.   Everything from a gold DCI card to a small prize of MtG product to a custom playmat to a signed edition of artwork would be available for consideration.   Even a custom trophy can be awarded.

The point is, WotC can do a little bit more with little to no investment (other than principally time) to make being chosen a valuable commodity.   I'm sure that ideas from this can be incorporated into the current program and should be considered if this concept is given a green light.

Conclusion
This concept isn't one that everyone will support.   I expect there to be a fair amount of discussion about pro's and con's of different aspects of this concept.   Let's be clear about a what the goal is though.   Players are currently not fully satisfied with some aspects of the current methods of recognition.   Magic the Gathering is 20 years old, and it is time for a full review of how to move forward and improve recognition of players and contributors to the community.

The goal is as follows:

Find a way that improves recognition, bolsters the play experience, and addresses the needs of the entire community.

I believe that this plan does that and more.   It will be something that WotC must fully engage in as a parent, but I think the concepts here are a starting point to make certain that it is a fair process that places the weight of responsibility back on the community to be successful.   In the end, that is what this is all about.   The community, supporting and recognizing the those that make it special.

If you need further convincing, just ask yourself one question.   Who do you think deserves to be recognized as a top contributor to the community - and why haven't they been yet?



Things I Think I Think but Couldn't Fit Elsewhere:
1. Sheldon Menery - First off, I think this man deserves his own category for his contribution to creating one of the coolest formats we play today.   That aside, he recently wrote an article that touches on the topics expressed in this article.   You can find it here: My Hall of Fame Ballot.   When you're done reading it, ask yourself if he's right - or if this idea I've outlined here would be a better way to recognize those that make Pro Tour happen.   It's something to consider.   With a few additional categories, we could accommodate Sheldon's idea and still come up with something wonderful.

2. MTGO - I really have only a basic idea of what Magic Online is and an even more limited idea of what the Community Cup is.   And that's it's problem.   Recognition for a job well done shouldn't be limited to a microcosm of a community that has multiple barriers to entry (truth).   We need to break out of the MTGO Community Cup and find a way to thank anyone and and everyone.   The MTGO model could continue, but my belief is that if it does not evolve it will become stagnate.

3. Retailers & Content Providers - They are the true engine for this award system.   Without them, this can't happen.   I will state this unequivocally - any retailer that wants to talk to me about this I'm happy to do so, at length.   This concept is one that will require them to work - but the dividends for participation and the end result are WELL worth the investment.

4. Mark Rosewater - The discussion on Twitter about the problems with the Community Cup came full circle with a pair of Tweets by MaRo yesterday.   I've been working on this article for almost three weeks, and he sums up the problem in 144 characters.   Mark, thank you for your position.   Judging by your statement, I finally think the time is write to polish and publish.   Here it is, this one is for you, Helene, and all of the others at WotC that support the community well above and beyond punching a clock.

____________________________________

Reblogs & Retweets & Mentions of all kinds are appreciated - as an independent writer I'm only read when others like what they see and share with their friends.

Wednesday, August 7, 2013

My Game, My Color

The last post I wrote challenged some preconceptions about the Pro Tour Hall of Fame ballot process.   I still have an idea rummaging around in my brain pan about challenging another major preconception, but it's still in its infancy.  Until I figure out how to express this new idea, I'm going to take a personal look at my own personal beliefs about Magic, the color pie, and my place in it.

As a Gamer I Am Mostly...
...boring.   I'm 40 years of age, but this isn't something that has happened recently due to my descent into decrepitude.   I've been playing games my whole life.   A good portion of that was spent playing video games, starting as early as the now legendary Atari 2600.   I looked for games that had depth and allowed me to choose my own fate.  In any situation I could choose how I played, from Dungeons and Dragons role playing to Mass Effect, I was inexorably drawn towards playing characters in a very narrow way.   Blame it on a million different factors, but if I could be Lawful Good (or some derivation thereof), I would be a shining example for the eons.

So as a video gamer if we were to apply Magic's color wheel to my gameplay philosophy, you would think I would be described as a player who preferred white.   Very white.   Historically, I was drawn towards games that allowed me to make decisions that were altruistic.   I wanted to impose order.  I felt a strong pull towards helping other players.   I never enjoyed playing as a Cleric, but playing as a Paladin or a helpful thief with a conscious was always possible.   I was the guy that could tell you how every game with more than one path to completion ended - so long as it was the only path that was possible if I made morally 'good' choices.    Even playing Grand Theft Auto, I was the good guy.  Don't think for a moment that I didn't try to occasionally shrug off my mantle of righteousness to get to the alternate ending of a role-playing game.   I would start off with the evilest of intentions.   It would all be for naught.   I'd get two or three days into a game and suddenly find myself rescuing the maiden or solving the villagers' problems, instead of creating the ruin I set out to do.   Mayhem was not my middle name.   Actually, it was probably more like Fred.   'Fred the Paladin' has a ring to it, doesn't it?

But where does that need to be the high and mighty gamer come from?

In Real Life, I'm...
...the same, boring personality.   I follow the rules.   Actually, that's not completely true as I do have a problem with posted speed limits.   I prefer to think of them as guidelines.   I'm not here though to defend my medical condition of Plumbum Pedis.

Where were we?   Ah yes, my penchant for following rules.   At work, I deal constantly with people that want me to bend rules, just this 'one' time.   But that, my friends, is the path to chaos.   Break the rules once?   Not on my watch.   Co-workers think it's cute (actually, they think I'm downright annoying at times), but I'm over what people think.   My kids think I only look at life in terms of black and white.   People who really know me realize that I have a small streak of bad in me.   Something that lets me have fun - but ONLY when it's the right time and the right place.

I won't go too much into my personal life.   It would put most readers to sleep.   What is important from this trip down the rabbit hole of Magic Dad's psyche is that we realize that in my personal life, I'd align more than VERY WHITE with the Magic Color Pie.   I'm actually 100% white - to the point that lands other than plains would never touch my hands.   Artifacts would be banished from my sight.   In fact, I don't know if I would suffer players of other colors sitting at the same table, nay, in the same room as me.

But, in Magic the Gathering...
...I identify with another color.   To find the way to who I am, I have to talk a little bit first about what I'm not.

How have I bucked 40 years of gameplay tradition you ask?   The answer may be less about being able to derail years of environmental and genetic inputs, and more about really understanding the classification of colors in Magic.   Let's first look at the color pie and what it lets us do.   I'm going to borrow heavily from the guru of Color Pie wisdom, Mark Rosewater (any mistakes are mine) as I talk about the colors of Magic.

White - Let's deal with the elephant in the room.   I don't align strongly with White.    White does stand for altruism (check).   It stands for following the rules and getting others to follow the rules for the good of the collective (check).   It seeks to share resources (check).   It does seem to do many of the things that I enjoy from other games.   So why isn't it right for me?   Most every player identifies more with one color than any other.   Even if they don't claim to, certainly they favor a color over others.

White does have a certain affinity for me.   I enjoy playing it as a second color.   My only Commander deck is Boros (Red/White).   That's more from lack of resources though than for any other reason.   It's the closest I could get to a red deck with what cards are at my disposal.   White is also rarely my first pick as a color in limited, even when presented with a bomb.   There is another color in Magic that identify with in a much stronger, more visceral manner.

Black - I'm sure you realize that as black is the polar opposite of white, it's rarely a color I want to be playing.   Certainly, black has an allure that I find tantalizing.   Creatures and spells that look to create some chaos on the board in the form of Deathtouch and tricks with the graveyard can be fun to play.   I'm not altogether comfortable playing Black though.   It's more than the association with Zombies, graveyards and Demons that makes me uncomfortable.

Black is chaotic.   I've never piloted it without having some personally unexpected results.   My favorite being when I forget for the millionth time that Deathtouch doesn't beat First Strike.   Ah, Deathtouch.   I don't think there is any creature ability that fills players with such trepidation.   Do I attack?   When do I attack?   Do I hold?   What is the most likely result from going on the offensive?   A single creature with Deathtouch on the board forces both players to evaluate, then re-evaluate every attack.   It can be very painful when it's misplayed.   Chaos indeed.

Blue - I think I'm least comfortable with Blue.   I appreciate much of what it stands for - thoughtful planning and measured outcomes.   I enjoy playing a mid to large size blue flyer as much as the next guy.   Yet when it's time to plan out 3 steps in advance (including opponent responses) to optimize my uses of Cancel and Negate, I often just phase out.   I find it difficult to remain interested in the planning process required to pilot blue decks.

I want to be more Blue.   I know this is the color that pros and power players drift towards (so long as the format supports it), but my comfort with being in control to the point that I can pilot my deck while denying the right components of my opponent's deck isn't there yet.   Perhaps in time, I'll figure out how to make Blue work for me.

Green - I love green.   Perhaps it is a result of my formative years watching Sesame Street and becoming entranced with Oscar.   It could also be that I associate it with my love for nature.   Or perhaps, I just like making things big and smashing face.   Green is almost exclusively about growth.   Tokens, counters and buffs that make opponents stare holes into their hand looking for answers is what Green reminds me of when I play it.   And let us not forget the fat creatures that get bigger and bigger with the right support.

If I had to choose between White and Green, I'd pick Green (it is close though and largely depends on the format).   I appreciate the ability to simply wade in and do damage.   It also seems rather neutral to me in terms of alignment, a little bit of, "I don't care what you think," is happening with Green players.   In the end though, it isn't my preferred color.   That honor goes to the last color I want to talk about.

Red - Red runs contrary to almost everything I told you about myself as a gamer.   So why Red?

Let's go back a moment and look at something important I said earlier.   I told you that I couldn't stand being the cleric, but I loved being the Paladin.   The logic behind that statement is that I simple enjoy doing damage.    I don't need it to be clever (like Blue), nor do I want it to be sacrificial (like Black).   I want to be strong enough for it to hurt (unlike White).   And I want to do it fast (unlike some of Green).   Give me a 2/2 with haste, and I'm happy.   Better yet, give me a 4/2 with haste and I'm in heaven.   Red is about being aggressive and punishing the player across from you.   The question shouldn't be why do I enjoy playing Red.   Rather, it should be why doesn't everyone?

Red is emotional for many who play it.   For me though, it has become less about my emotion than it is about my opponents.   From what I can gather, many players really don't like running up against a mono-red deck.   They almost tilt from the first play, giving me an advantage.   Mono-red is not always the strongest deck in a format - but it doesn't have to be when you take into account how others react to it being played.

This is only a part of the story.   I'm sure, having read this far, that you're still wondering how I came to align as a red player.   There is one critical part of my gaming pedigree that I kept from you.

Hit'm Hard
When I play computer games, notably single player games, I do play as a white knight.   But when I play social games, whether they are computer, card, or board games, I have a slightly different personality.   I have no problem selling out my neighbor.   I don't care if I rob Peter to pay Paul, so long as it messes up Mark's next turn.

Here is one little story to help you understand best why I'm red.   Four years ago, I was taking a comprehensive training course.   One night of the course, the fifty of us enrolled engaged in a game set up by the instructors.   The game was unlike anything we had ever played.   The premise of the game was simple.   Teams of five to six players are formed and you worked with your team to make a simple decision each turn over a course of 10 turns.   If one team selects X and the others select Y, then the team that picked X receives all of the points and the teams that pick Y receives negative points.   If two teams pick X then they split the points and the Y teams get negative points.   But, if all teams picked Y, then they would equally split a small amount of positive points.  On the chance that all the teams in a pod selected X, then they would all receive negative points.   The stakes increase as the game progresses and the rules change to encourage greater collusion between teams.   Teams that realize early one that working together has a consistent, flat pay out do alright.   Teams that figure out screwing over everyone around them is the only way to really come out ahead CAN do better - but at a cost.

Turns 1-3, the teams in my pod worked independently of each other.   We were in a pod with three other teams, and our decisions were weighed against the other teams.   We always made the choice to maximize personal value by choosing X, but this penalized other teams in my pod who were slow to catch on to the concept.   By the third turn, the other teams on my side of the room had figured out how the game worked and had started to encroach on our strategy, negating further advancement in points.   Then the rules changed.

We were to send one representative from each pod to discuss the next decision.   Point values would be doubled.   For the next three turns, all of the teams in my pod agreed to work together.   Slowly, each team in my pod advanced on the scoreboard.

Then the rules changed again.   At the start of turn seven, point values would be 5 times what they were before.   Now remember that if we worked together, we would all advance.   But if one team betrayed the others, they would reap tremendous points if they could pick the right time to do it.

For turn seven, our team worked with the others in our pod.   But while our rep was sent to the conference before turn eight, I turned to my other teammates and looked at them and said, "We're going to win this.   Are you ready?"  I still don't think even my own teammates at that point really understood the game.   But I could see it.   In fact, I saw it back at the start of round four.  I realized then that we'd be allowed to meet together for the rest of the game and the game would increase in bonus multipliers at least one more time.

By turn nine, everyone would be salivating at the chance for big points.   Teams would betray one another.   I figured it was highly likely that half the teams in my pod would turn on the other half.   By acting in turn eight, my team would have the advantage.

The call went out, and we made our decision known.   We gained a ridiculous amount of points, while the other teams in our pod went down in flames.

We were yelled at.   A lot.   One of the other teams were practically screaming at us.   To this day, there are one or two people on the opposing teams that won't talk to me (truth is, they also left the organization immediately following that weekend - but they weren't exactly mentally stable to begin with).   I tilted half a room of grown adults.   In a room with half the adults yelling, most of them at me, I sat there and smiled.

We played by the rules.   No rule said we had to abide by the agreement of the other teams.   In fact, it works better if you don't.   It's not unlike Magic.   There is known information in the game, but there is also hidden information, that may only be known to one player.   If that one player can use the information fairly and to his or her advantage, should they not act upon it?

FULL DISCLOSURE - The ultimate purpose of the game in the setting when we played it was to do one of two things.   It was either to provide that perfect moment where everyone gets upset, realizes how silly they all are and then provides a point to reset their teams and move forward as one OR it was to provide a total team building experience.   I took the low road - but I was tired at that point and was analyzing the game for the sake of figuring out how to break it.   I'm told this is one measure of how staff are selected for future courses (and yes, I was invited back to be on staff after 'breaking' the game).   I also have anecdotal evidence of this game ending in fist fights.  It's amazing how seriously people take things sometimes.  Also, as a rule adults are more altruistic as a group than youth are when this game is played.   Most youth get to a point very early on where they don't care about working together, they'll all go down with the ship to try to get one chance to make a big gain in points.

Conclusion
And that, my friends, is why I'm red.   I like to win, and to do so in a way that sows a small amount of discord at the same time.   If you tilt, it's not my fault.   You need to realize that tilting is purely a personal issue, and controlling your reaction to a game is something only you can have power over.   It doesn't help when you feel betrayed.   That is an emotion.   In the equation of the game, emotion is your enemy.

Magic is a social game.   Too many of us forget what that really means though.   It doesn't exclusively refer to the fact that we play it with other people and have a chance for conversation.   The full definition of Magic as a social game means that emotions, body language, and a certain amount of sleight of hand (figuratively, not literally) are important components to playing the game.   Those that understand this best are the players that will go the furthest.   Those that think it only means we come together to talk about the coolest cards in the new set will be stuck in the middle of the pack.   I know where I would rather be...do you?

____________________________________



Reblogs & Retweets & Mentions of all kinds are appreciated - as an independent writer I'm only read when others like what they see and share with their friends.   Even better for this story, leave me some feedback about why you identify with a particular color.   I'd love to hear about your opinion.