What is the BCP?
The Big Card Project (BCP) is a collaborative effort to make a custom Magic set as a community. For years, its goal was to be used in events during the WOTC forums running of their Unconventional Convention (UnCon). That event died after the WizO genocide of 2007. The community had one shot in 2008 to run it themselves, that attempt being good and valiant. Ultimately, WOTC felt there were too many legal issues in supporting it, and the forums were never the same. Still, even after that, the BCP ran for a few years, but suffered in the uncertain waters of the forums, the previous change-over being one of its biggest detriments. But we're here now, and if we want to run a successful BCP, we have to answer a few questions.

1. What will this BCP be used for?
   If all we want is to make a set as a community, that's more than fine and a great goal itself. But having other goals helps to drive the set forward. This is first on my list of things to discuss, but it's likely the last to be answered. We're still a new community and deciding to have some forum-wide celebration is a discussion much bigger than this thread. As I said, we'll probably move on with things before getting this answer, but it's something worth thinking about.
   
   
2. When do we want to finish by?
   This project is notorious for running into bumps along the way. One of the features that has gotten it completed in the past is firmly set schedules. (Someone get ty in here, he was running it long before I was.) Generally, it's taken between 9 months and a year to finish. That might sound long, but it's well in tune with reality. We can aim for quicker, but given the way communities work together, I think those stated timetables are reasonable. (They're also sensible if it again becomes an annual project.)
   
   
3. How big do we want the set to be?
   Ambitious as YMTC is as a community, we've only ever made small sets. BCP1 was 30 cards! BCP4, the last completed BCP, was 125 cards big. I think there's a possibility that we could put together a large sized expansion, 200+ cards big. But I just wanted to point out that we've never done so before, and even those small sets took a long time to work out. This directly influences our timetables, too, so the two discussions should depend on each other.
   
   
4. What do we want to change about the process of previous years, if anything?
   Here's how it worked:
   
   1. Someone starts the process, usually a lead from the previous year. (We'll say Bun did it this time.)
   2. An open submission thread is made for people to enter theme submissions. These can be mechanically or flavorfully driven.
   3. Community votes and discusses until some sort of consensus is reached.
   4. An open candidate thread is opened for Design Leads (DLs) and Worldbuilding Leads (WLs). If you want on a team, you say so.
   5. We vote on those leads.
   6. DLs begin discussions on how to implement the theme mechanically and begin hosting contests to gather cards and ideas. WLs begin discussions on the setting and conflicts and story of the set.
   7. More contests and discussions and votes as the Leads see fit.
   8. Once a lot of cards have been gathered into the design file, the same lead process is held for Development Leads (VLs).
   9. ICDs and MCDs are opened to discuss how the cards should be changed before finalizing their spot in the finished design file.
   10. Playtesting!
   11. VLs do hole-filling contests.
   12. More playtesting.
   13. Set is finished.
   
   There may ways to improve this process (or change it altogether). If you think of any, shout em out.
   
   
5. Do we want a subforum or a forum unto itself?
   Subforum makes sense since there's a direct tie to YMTC, but it also comes with people accidentally posting non-related items in it with greater frequency.
   
   
6. Do we want to call it BCP?
   New forums, new ways. Maybe a name and an initialism to make it our own?

Those are the main issues I think we should discuss (or figure out where we can) before moving into the actual project. Also, there's a mild stigma about me taking over things without consent, and I suppose I can admit to at least a moderate bit of that being true. I'm not posting this because I want it to be "Rush's Community Project". (I already tried that. I'm not reliable.) I'm posting it to impart past lessons on those people who do end up running this, whether I'm one of them or not, and with the hope that we can start on the right path from the onset.

So, discuss away, and if there are any points you think we need to address before the BCP starts, bring them up and I'll add them to the list above.

I think a set around the size of BCP 4 is a good place to start at. There's no point in only completing 50% of a 300 card set.

I think calling it BCP is fine, there isn't a need to change the name

(1) Probably an UnCon.

(2) Need to answer 3 first. Size should determine timeframe.

(3) Around 100 cards?

(4) No idea, the skeleton looks good.

(5) Subforums could be nice for this.

(6) I dunno, if there is a BCP on the WotC forums, it could get confusing if we're all on the same number...

~SE++

I think with most of the same people in charge of the BCP here and not on wotc, BCP on wotc is probably not going to happen. I thought we would just continue the numbering scheme too (that makes this BCP number ? ? ?)

It would be BCP7. The BCP hasn't had an active run on WOTC in at least 2 years; maybe more. BCP5 and BCP6 were never completed, but might as well let them remain 5 and 6 for the sake of posterity. I have no idea where BCP3 disappeared to.

I always thought the BCP sets were too small, even BCP4, which was actually the biggest. But even though I'm in support of a 150-200 card set, we've got much fewer people over here than at WotC, so a smaller set size than that might be warranted simply because we'll have less people working on it.

As far as the development process goes, the most important thing is something that someone mentioned before - the fact that some people, including leads, will inevitably cease working on the set (I'm actually guilty as charged here ), while others will come to try and step in. The system should be semi-automated, and clear enough that all it really needs to work is someone to take the initiative and post the appropriate threads. Of course there should be wiggle room for the more dedicated people to act more efficiently, but I think our top priority should be creating a system that doesn't require a lot of leadership, nor does it bring too much burden/power onto a single person. The current outline is decent, but probably has some room for fine-tuning.

Simply due to the nature of phpBB, running the BCP in a single subforum will prove to be more difficult, particularly if we decide to do [ICD]s again. Having its own forum would be the best solution, but I can understand the arguments against it.

I don't think there's a need in changing the name, we've already got "YMtC", and quite possibly "UnCon" as well. Unless a majority of the community feels the need to call BCP something else, it just seems like yet another insignificant and unnecessary bureaucratic procedure to vote on. The numbering scheme would still be up for debate, though... We could always go the Mega Man route and call it BCPX?

Its going to be winter soon so I think people will have more time. We could do a 249 card set easily, but story can change set size easily.

I disagree with the easily. I think a small group of people can make a set easily. I think a large community can make a disjointed collection of cards easily. But every experience I've ever had suggests that making a big sit will NOT BE EASY. Differing opinions get in the way of making it an easy process. They are, however, what will make the set better.

Maybe

I'd like to be on the dev team.

Anyways, what do you think of my idea of making a set skeleton, then letting devs host 24hour contests at their leisure to fill in the slots? I like it because it makes it easier for card creation contests to get started.

As for size, I'm down with a BCP4 size BCP.

The skeleton is a good idea. I don't think we've done one before, but that was before MaRo posted articles about it and I've used them for my own sets since. The general framework of it is bound to change and you might want to wait until we know what the theme is. For example, a color specific theme or a multicolor theme will drastically change what the skeleton looks like. I don't want to discourage you from making one, and I imagine changing it afterward won't be the most difficult thing.

As for the contests, I don't think they need to be restricted to 24 hour contests, though those certainly can be part of things. I tend to think the contests work better to whatever style the host enjoys running them in. But the idea of a solid timespan in which to run them seems like a good idea. Targeted skeleton-filling contests make more sense later in the process rather than early. The beginning parts need to be fluid and allow for change as the theme evolves into whatever it wants to be, and bogging down the specifics of "We need a Pacifism variant" gets in the way of that evolution initially. Once you want things to stop that process of change, skeleton filling contests make a load of sense.

I'm just posting here to say that I support this idea and will be keeping an eye on the creative side of things.

Another thing that was talked about prior to these forums being established was having an article site attached to the forums. (Somewhat like what WOTC has now.) Early talks regarding this place centered on it being the "creative hub" for the Magic and D&D universe. I was thinking a BCP weekly article would be nice to run, talking about steps to build a community set, what particularly we were going through, and so on. Things that would draw attention to it on a direct level that didn't require diving through a tons of threads and posts.

Anyway, it's not crucial that such a thing be set up before we start, but I wanted to mention that there'd been discussion of it.

I support a bigger set.

I plan on making half of it myself. You guys can get the other half.

Don't joke about things you know everyone would approve of.

I can do the other half if you want to wait a year.

My Gandervell set was:

100 Commons
67 Uncommons
50 Rares
16 Mythics

For a total of 253 cards.

I think this is the perfect size for a set. Nice, round numbers. (I went off of Innistrad's 107/67/59/16 rarity breakdown.)

In short, I support a larger set. I really think we can do it.

mythics eww

You know, I feel the same way. Just not a fan of making a new rarity that is even harder to get. I liked the common/uncommon/rare distribution. It made sense. But adding in a new rarity that isn't even guaranteed to show up? Ugh, just idiotic to me.

~SE++

To do with set size, I reckon the same size as a real small set (around 160 cards)

Also @Parad: If we were doing an official-size large set it would be
249 cards
106 commons
67 uncommons
59 rares
17 mythics

Or something more like that. And yours add up to only 233 cards.