I seem to always find lots and lots of discourse about block sets. Two sides of the same argument every time.
Side 1 says something like:"I hate all these random sets, I miss block sets."
To which, Side 2 says; "Well block sets never sold as well at the end, players attention span's are better suited for one and done blocks."
My problem with this response is that it essentially ignores the initial statement. Rather than clarifying what they mean, they assume and answer.
Personally, I miss block sets, but ONLY from a story perspective.
Basically, do sets exactly the same as you're doing now. Draft is better now than blocks were, standard with Foundations sounds fantastic. The only thing I'd like to see is a set of setup, and a set of payoff.
MKM was a set based on a murder mystery with the big twist ending basically included in the release, as an example. It could've benefitted from a real, but delayed, payoff. Set up the consequences for each suspect, then reveal and give different consequences that were hinted at in other ways. Bam. Improved.
The last time we visited New Phyrexia, it was a block, I remember ubiquitous speculation over how the story would wrap up. There were factions events at local game stores, branded posters and packs for the factions at play, etc. I had a friend get the New Phyrexian emblem tattooed on themselves. The story felt *Important* and so much less divorced from magic than it does today.
Usually, in my experience, when someone asks for blocks, they're asking for the story to matter. There are lots of mechanically interesting card games out there, and mechanics are only part of what makes magic, magic!
All I would ask is that writers get the opportunity to do setups and payoffs with magic's evolving story with multiple sers, and that story related sets have *some* play synergies. They don't need to share mechanical themes just to share story themes, but it would be a nice little florish if they had mechanical synchronisets,
Hell, a REALLY good idea (in my opinion) would be to do these sets in a different order than the old method. Modern fantasy novels swap POV characters and follow different stories. Why not set up multiple stories in a row, then start to alternate resolving an older, established plot line, and then starting a new one or swapping to another established one. This really gives players time to get interested and speculate (and making the story FEEL present will likely also boost novels and comics numbers, etc., if you need a monetary reasoning.)
What do you think Mark?

We already do a lot of what you’re asking. Each Magic “year” does have a larger connected story, often with different POV characters.

"Why has the bar for supplemental sets gotten higher? Is it universes beyond?Universes Beyond and Modern Horizons are the biggest two causes." That really sucks, a lot of us really looked forward to the summer supplemental sets because of how fun they were, 2 headed giant draft and conspiracy immediately come to mind.

The bar gets raised because new products do well. More players play them, more players buy them, and more players rank them higher in market research. It’s not some diabolical plot. It’s the game evolving towards what the players are most enjoying.

So what you're saying is that there is no plan in place for when you invariably misjudged how powerful something in foundations would be and you've just accepted that ruining standard for 5 years is okay

We have tools built in to adjust to problems. What we don’t do is plot out every potential problem. We’re just too busy, and it’s too big of a task. If one comes up, we’ll address it

"Innistrad is one of my best designs."Yeah, Innistrad was great when it was unique, and gothic horror is an incredibly deep well to draw from. There's tons of source material, and it's easy to make it feel "universal".These days, it feels like every premier set is trying to be Innistrad, unless it's a Storyline Set or a Return Set. The Innistrad-likes all feel like "Magic does [genre]" instead of something actually original, Storyline Sets are practically Return Sets, and the actual Return Sets are half Innistrad-likes anyway.The Modern Horizons sets are the last bastion of bottom-up, Magic doing Magic sets, but they're infrequent, expensive, and overshadowed by how they destroy the Modern metagame every time.I just want a new world that makes me feel like I'm reading the Planeswalker's Guide to Alara again. A world that only makes sense in Magic the Gathering, instead of Magic fitting itself into something that already exists.

I want to begin by stressing something. You’re talking to me, the Head Designer of Magic. I, along with rest of the designers, are in charge of the mechanical execution of design. We create the larger structure of how the set is build, weave in flavorful themes, and design mechanics to play into that structure and theme(s). When I talk about sets I’ve done I’m talking about the part of the process I’m in charge of. With that said, let’s talk about the latest design I led (vision design), Outlaws of Thunder Junction. I hold up its game design to any other set I’ve lead. The mechanics are sharp, useful, and lead towards new play patterns. The limited play and constructed play involving its themes are novel. And while it’s all forward facing, it was designed to be more backwards compatible than previous sets. Plot, in particular, is one of the most exciting new mechanics I’ve designed in a long time. It’s simple in description, but surprisingly deep in strategy. Having the primary focal point of villainy, with a secondary theme of the Western genre, led my team to create something new. Top-down is just an input. Good design can come from any input. Bottom-up design is no better at making good mechanic designs than top-down. I believe current mechanical design is on point, and Outlaws of Thunder Junction, in particular, is my team being on their A game.

Hello Mark. Why sorcery speed for plot ? Would you mind giving us more details than ‘it played better’ ? Thanks !

If plot cards were instants, they’d always be on, meaning the opponent would have to be on guard at all times. By making them sorceries, we make them easier to monitor and reduce the complexity of tracking them. In addition, we have to cost cards for their strongest use, so making them instants would make us have to cost them more, which means they became less viable unless you’re taking advantage of them being instants.Finally, we want to be careful of people getting caught unaware by public knowledge, as it can be very frustrating. It’s why most flashback cards are cast from the graveyard at “sorcery speed”.

“I'm not sure anyone really cares about random murders on Innistrad. They happen constantly.”That was a plot point in the story of MKM. There were plenty of random murders on Ravnica, nobody cared until a high ranking person in the guilds was murdered. (If this gets answered, all of you need to read the MKM web fiction it is excellent)Though the point of Innistrad being too horror focused for a murder mystery still stands

People care. There are police on Ravnica and they solve murders. The original Ravnica novel was literally about a cop solving a murder.

Is it too early to ask where plot, outlaws matter, and saddle seem to sit on the storm scale? If it’s not too early to ask, then I would like to ask

It’s a little early.

I want to second the person saying plot is a slam dunk mechanic. Suspend is my favorite mechanic, and plot has a lot of the same feel with the added flexibility and decision making, while being a lot easier for people to track. A+++, I hope we see it very regularly

Success breeds repetition.

Mark, why doesn't plot grant haste to plotted creatures the way suspend does? It feels like the two mechanics would run into similar issues there.

It’s an expectation thing. Playtesters didn’t feel like it was supposed to have haste. I think you choosing when to cast it just felt different than the spell counting down.

Could an MDFC or Split-card have plot?

The rules could support it, but it would cause some confusion and be tricky to design.