Could suitable un-cards get eternal "un-reprints"? That is, using a new name but identical abilities, like was the plan for Tammy, Power Gamer, and using a variant on Universes Within's "=SLD" label to mark that the cards are equivalent for casual games despite having different tournament legality. Would that be viable?

We clearly can make the same cards with a new name (if the card works within the rules). I’m more skeptical we’d use the Universe’s Within “same card” tech.

Hi Mark! I wanted to give my own thanks to you and the card game I love so dearly. When I was 16, friendless and hopelessly autistic without realising it, a friend of my sister saw me walking down the street and gave me a tupperware box of Magic cards that he was about to throw away (mostly goblins from 10th Edition).

I went to my LGS to learn how to play the game and found not only a love for the game, but a creative outlet, a great group of friends, and the confidence I needed to grow as a person.

I was hired to run their Magic events and eventually worked my way up to manager/"The Card Guy" and some of my happiest life moments, including finding an equal passion for reading DC comics, were made during my decade of working there.

I can only imagine where I would be if I hadn't gone to my LGS to learn Magic that day, but I know I can't imagine my life without it, so thank you to everyone who helped make, and continues to make, such a wonderful game.

P.S. the first booster I ever opened was Avaycn Restored and after being blown away by Vorstclaw I've been a Timmy ever since!

Thanks for sharing.

I am usually a big fan of the worldbuilding and story telling, but can I say I would have MUCH preferred just a set full of villains without canonically putting them on the same plane? It feels like it both waters down the Wild West theme and makes little creative sense. I guess what I’m asking for is more Origins style sets that are more focused than Core Sets but aren’t all set on one world? Maybe Anthology sets could be a name for them?

Part of the omenpath change was to allow us to do this type of showcase set, but yes, I hear what you (and others) are saying. This is a rare case where Timmy/Tammy and Vorthos butt up against one another.

I hope you’re doing well, Mark. I study the Enneagram of personality and I thought you’d find this interesting. I believe your psychographics are analogous with what we call the instinctual drives: Tammy the “self-preservation” drive; Jenny the “one-to-one” drive; and Spike the “social” drive. (The names of the drives might be slightly counterintuitive to how they manifest in behavior, e.g., social types are often concerned about status.)

Interesting.

Which of the Player Archetypes would "Plays Magic for the social aspect" fall under? Or is that something not covered by any of the archetypes since it's something outside the game itself?

That’s Timmy/Tammy. They’re driven by experiences, which includes social experiences.

First, I want to say that "Throne of the Grim Captain" is a cool card that tickles both the Johnny and Timmy parts of my brain in just the right ways. Kudos to whoever designed it.However, I think it was a mistake to tease the type line "Legendary Creature - Skeleton Spirit Pirate" when the card in question can't actually be used as a Commander.There's always going to be some risk of disappointment involved when teasing cards, but I think "don't tease Legendary type lines that can't be used as a commander" is a low bar to clear.I mainly say this because it is a bit sad to see so many people down on such a cool card.

Let me ask everyone here. I have a cool creature type line that’s legendary, but can’t be played as a commander. Should I not include it in my teaser?

So we have Timmy, the green gamer who loves putting big stuff on the battlefield, Johnny, the blue gamer who lives for cool and interesting combos, Spike, the black gamer who wants to win as fast as possible, and Vorthos, the red gamer who cares about the theming and lore of a character/place/etc. What will the white gamer be called, and what will they care about, if we even get a final gamer in the cycle?

Timmy/Tammy, Johnny/Jenny, and Spike are the three psychographics. The two aesthetic profiles are Vorthos and Mel. Mel does like things orderly. : )

Just out of curiosity, why are griefers considered a subset of Timmy/Tammy? Because one could argue that something like “I’m gonna build a deck specially designed to create the worst playing experience I can possibly imagine” ala copying Sharazhad a ton of times or stealing every lands better reflects the self expression of Johnny/Jenny

There are Johnny/Jenny Griefers and Spike Griefers. The vast majority tend to be Tammy/Timmy though as the enjoy the experience of griefing.

I think WOTC needs to acknowledge another Player Archtype, other than Johnny, Timmy, and Spike.
This player's name is Nick.
Nick is a contrarian. Who only likes things other players dislike.
Classic Nick cards:ShahrazadHumilityArmageddon Stasis
Nick loves banding, and flanking, and regenerates.
I think R&D needs to make more Nick cards

Nick is just a subset of Timmy and Tammy. R&D refers to that subtype as a Griefer.

With Battle maybe debuting in MOM, are you more excited for certain types of players to get it like Timmy, Johnny, and Spike? Or certain formats to get it, like Commander, limmited, and competitive? Or do you think it will be hit to almost all kinds of players and formats?

I promise I will talk all about battles when it’s time to talk about them.