Hey Maro,If/when functional reprint of Serra angel into blue with a relevant creature type. Just realized now that blue has vigilance and flying.

Been there done that. (Okay, it was Planar Chaos, but we could reprint it.)

Can the Rules distinguish between when a card has a keyword counter on it versus having the keyword not from a counter? E.g., Creatures you control with Flying Counters on them also have Vigilance.

Yes, I believe the rules can, much like it can care about a card having a +1/+1 counter.

Why do [keyword] counters function as pseudo permanent keywords on a creature instead of having a unique ability to each [keyword] counter?ie (creature with [vigilance] counter has vigilance until they block another creature, then they lose 1 [vigilance] counter) or something like that?

+1/+1 (and -1/-1 ) counters permanently change a creature’s power/toughness and that’s the most commonly used counters on creatures.

Is experimental synthesizer a bend or a break since the token it makes has vigilance?

It’s a bend as red doesn’t get vigilance, but it’s not undermining Red’s weakness.

Hey mark. Y’all in R&D infamously “avoid doing two-colour creatures which could be done in a single color”, like a creature with flying and vigilance, for example. I am not rehashing that argument, because I fully understand why the answer to that question is GB (although since vigilance is allowed in blue now that means that the UB option that was wrong at the time now is also a correct answer). That said, I do have some qualms with the premise of that question. We see multicolored cards that don’t need all their colors CONSTANTLY. Just in Thunder Junction, we got:- Wylie duke, which can be in white or green, and doesn’t need to be both- Vraska joins up, which can be done in mono green and doesn’t need black- Selvala, which can be done in mono green and doesn’t need white- Seraphic steed, which can be done in mono white and doesn’t need green- Rakdos joins up, which could be done in mono black and doesn’t need red- Miriam, which could be done in mono green and doesn’t need white- Marchesa, who can be done in blue or black, and doesn’t need to be both, and DEFINITELY doesn’t need red- Lilah, who could be done in red or blue and doesn’t need to be both- Jasper flint, who can be done in Black or red and doesn’t need to be both- Jem, who could be done in mono blue and doesn’t need white- Form a posse, which could be done in red or white and doesn’t need to be both- Breeches, who can be done in mono red and doesn’t need blue- At knifepoint, which could be done in mono red and doesn’t need black- Obeka, which could be dimir or izzet and doesn’t need to be grixis- Vihaan, who could be done in boros and doesn’t need black- Kirri, which could be in mono green, and doesn’t need red or white- Yuma, which could be done in mono green (and maybe mono red?) but definitely doesn’t need white- Olivia, which could be boros or rakdos and doesn’t need to be mardu- Pest control, which could be mono white and doesn’t need blackI don’t really know what I’m asking, but I just wanted to bring up that unnecessary colors appear on multicolored spells VERY frequently; and I wanted to know if you have any thoughts about this.

That’s why I say “we try” and not “we always do”. When a multicolor card doesn’t have abilities of two colors, we’ll tag it in the Council of Colors pass, and the lead designer will see if hey can find an elegant solution. It’s not a mandatory thing though, as it’s hard to do without making cards extra wordy and clunky. Again, that’s why I say “we try” to do it as it’s something we do when we can, but often don’t do.

Is there a reason Raggadragga says "If a creature you control with a mana ability attacks, untap it" and not "Creatures with mana abilities you control have vigilance"?

If you grant vigilance as an attack trigger, it doesn’t functionally do anything. You just have a tapped creature with vigilance as the creature had to tap to attack (before that vigilance granting happens).

Why does blue need vigilance so badly? It went from none to a lot in the design skeleton more so than mechanics blue has had for years. Why not just use when this creature attacks untap it?

It’s just simpler to use vigilance. We also are more willing to have a third color have evergreen keywords.

Thank you for the Nuts & Bolts article! My group has been eagerly awaiting its release. You mentioned that vigilance has started to appear in blue more often: how can we keep up with changes like this outside of a Nuts & Bolts article? It's difficult to get an idea for, say, how many first strikes at common White gets through spoiler lists.

There isn’t a lot of places to get the information which is why I do the “Nuts & Bolts” articles. I do update my color pie article every four years or so.

Just want to say that, as a fan of exert and Amonkhet block limited, I'm very glad you aren't considering changing it to use stun counters. The block had lots of built in ways to untap creatures or give them vigilance to get around exert, which would interact completely differently with stun counters. Significant functional errata is something to avoid regardless, but I think it's a particularly bad idea to make such errata in a way that would completely change the mechanic's own limited format.

It changes things more than I think most people think it would.

Is Experimental Synthesizer a break? Red doesn't get Vigilance, yet the token it makes has it.

It’s more bend than break.