Is Dragonstorm too strong for standard? I think I'll be a little disappointed if we get to the end of the Dragonstorm story arc and the card isn't printed into any of the sets within it. Is this something you (WotC, not you personally) took into consideration when naming the arc? I realize it's probably too early for you to answer this now, so I'll ask again after we return to Tarkir.

We’ve learned not to let old card names keep us from using words we need to use.

Mark, I'm a big horror fan, but I'm not sure about how blatant and trope-y some of these card names are. I mean, seriously, "Black Cat"? "Bump in the Night"? "Creepy Doll"? "Evil Twin"? I don't think this "Innistrad" plane is going to be a hit... ;)

: )

Nine-Lives Familiar uses "This Creature" instead of "Card Name" in the text. Will "Card Name" be no longer used in the text?

Yes, we are moving from “CARDNAME” to “this <card type>”.

Can you elaborate on why you can't make commander-only cards? While Wizards doesn't have explicit control over Commander legality, it seems like you ought to have de facto control by virtue of the fact that you can dictate legality for most non-commander formats.If, for example, you had pre-emptively banned sticker cards from Legacy and Vintage, the end result would be that the cards would be only legal in Commander and Limited. Is there a reason you don't consider doing something like that a viable option?

We don’t like pre-banning cards. It also just adds a lot of card names to the banned list which makes it harder to process.Commander is in an odd place as there’s a separate group that determines legality. We’re trying to not overstep our bounds.

"Q1: Can the rules text of a non-acorn card change the name of a card? Q2: Can cards have multiple names? I was wondering if texts like "This card's name is also Reach Through Mists" or "This card is named Dragon's Approach while in the graveyard" were legal. Q1: No. Q2: The same rules text can appear on two differently named cards." Just FYI, both parts of your answer seem to be wrong. Spy Kit both changes the name of a card (the equipped creature) and gives that creature multiple names.

Spy Kit, I believe, is an Un-card that snuck into a non-Un set. It does some things that cause problems, I believe.

Q1: Can the rules text of a non-acorn card change the name of a card?Q2: Can cards have multiple names?I was wondering if texts like "This card's name is also Reach Through Mists" or "This card is named Dragon's Approach while in the graveyard" were legal.

Q1: No.Q2: The same rules text can appear on two differently named cards.

hi mark!i love every pun i can find in magic cards :Dbut it got me wondering: do you sometimes considwr other languages while naming cards?So a card, thats a pun in german but just "a normal name" in english.

Normally when we make a pun in English, the translators love stepping up and find a pun in their language. And yes, sometimes they’ll find puns for cards that aren’t puns in English. We can’t design to foreign puns as card naming happens after the design is completed.

Something I've wondered for a while: I know it's a fine balancing act coming up with names for cards, because, once you've used up a word or phrase, that can only ever be that card again (i.e. there's only so many ways to say "no" for things like counter spell names), but does punctuation change that in any way for cards that have phrases for names? I doubt you could get away with "fireball!" being a different card, but could you use "No, more lies" as a different card from "No more lies"?

Currently, the same name, but with punctuation, is not considered a unique name.

on homarids:

1. They shouldn't be changed into crabs because they're lobsters.
2. "I don't understand all the doom and gloom about the future of the IP! Anyway we're removing all terms unique to it from the game".

1. I can’t speak to crab vs. lobster. Both would be considered.2. Changing creature types is not removing the words from the game. Card names and flavor text will still use the words.

Some thoughts on "Holy Cow":I don't think it's specifically an issue with Holy Cow in a vacuum.Instead, it's more about the massive increase in proliferation of "meme cards" and "joke cards", cards that make references to real life idioms, seek to break the 4th wall in some way, make puns or jokes that pander to everyone, naming cards after a ubiquitous a turn of phrase in pop culture, etc.Sometimes it's cute and whimsical but when it misses, it can feel pretty cringe. I don't want my favorite game to have a bunch of cringe references which becomes a possibility when Magic makes dozens of "joke cards". It also makes the Magic world and universe feel less bespoke and more like a series of existing references.

For what it's worth, I think the Holy Cow reference would have been funnier if it weren't so obvious (i.e. design the card as is with the same art but name it something different).

Years ago, I made this card:

I love puns, so much so that I wove this one into the story (this was the Weatherlight Saga that Michael and I created). Very, very few players got it. (The pun is “squeeze toy”, the squeezable rubber toy that makes noise when you squeeze it, like you would give a dog.) Every time I explain this, I get more people say, “I never got that.”I have nothing against the subtle joke now and then (and there are some pretty subtle jokes in the Un-sets), but I would rather do jokes that the majority of players get. If the trade of is some people roll their eyes and say “that’s not my style of humor”, but many others laugh and enjoy it, I’ll gladly take that. A joke more people get is “funnier” in the aggregate.