Has there ever been any thought to combining the Ox and Minotaur creature types? Such as simplifying both to simply "Cow?" I'm a huge fan of bovines in all forms and it would be nice if all of the Ox in magic worked alongside their more anthropomorphic cousins the Minotaur. As it is now we're lucky to really get cards of *either* type printed. There's resonance to the name Minotaur, no doubt, but it also has its share of baggage. It has Greek connotations and that's probably a big reason Minotaurs are almost strictly in Theros (although some favorites, such as Neheb, are from other planes). I was happy that Outlaws had more Ox cards, but it also highlights my dissatisfaction: Holy Cow is an *ox* not a cow, despite the name. It feels like a retread of the Hound or Naga debacle all over again. Hound was simplified to Dog and all Snakes, from rattlesnakes to Naga, are simply the type Snake now. This allows snakes and dogs of all walks benefit from a shared unity. Cats had it right, we didn't need Leonin as a separate type.I just feel like there's unnecessary separation being created by dividing Ox and Minotaur and it has the same resonance failings as all dogs being labeled "hounds" had. If it's important for a particular creature to *be* a minotaur then they can just *have* minotaur in their name, like ~30% of minotaurs already do. There's also the simple fact that Minotaur is a longer average creature type, limiting design space for other types to be included. It's hard to justify why a Minotaur is on a random plane, but much less so if it's simply a "Cow Warrior" for example. As for why I think "Cow" should just be the combined type name, I simply think it fits. Cow is a resonant name. Almost everyone, East to west, knows *of* cows if only because their milk is such a widely used commodity. We don't call it "Ox's milk" after all. More than that, it's fun! Cow is *funny* in the same way *squirrel* is funny. It's amusing to see "Squirrels you control" in this game full of fighting. In that vein, "Cows you control" is an amusing line that can help break up the seriousness of a setting. I know this is making a mountain out of a molehill, but magic is a game of different perspectives coming together and creating something new. Cows are my favorite animal and it's simply dissatisfying, to me, that my Holy Cow can't benefit from a Kragma Warcaller. That Angrath, colloquially named "Cow Dad" in the community, would have the creature type "Minotaur." The only downside I can see is that "Cow" *does* specifically refer to females of a bovine species. But that is a distinction few, if any, seriously take into consideration. If one sees a field of cows, they're not saying "I see lots of cows and 3 bulls!" They're going to say "I see cows!"So to bring the thesis back, has there been any discussion internally to simplifying the Minotaur and Ox creature types under a single banner, such as "Cow?" I would also happily settle for "Cattle" as the new type. I just feel the current Ox vs Minotaur divide has to go, for both flavor and mechanical reasons, and the sooner the better.

I have been on Team Cow (as I was on Team Dog) for many years. I even made Cows in Un-sets. I still believe Minotaur should be its own creature type though.

Now that Bloomburrow is in preview season, feels like a great opportunity to ask a question about magic which has always bugged me. How come birds get to fly but moles and other similar creatures don't get an evasion mechanic called "burrow" (i.e. flying but underground)?

Because we have an evergreen mechanic called flying and not one called burrowing. : )The closest we have to burrowing is “target creature with power 2 or less is unblockable” first seen on Dwarven Warriors in Alpha.

RE: different Angel tokens- there's currently: 4/4 Angel Warrior, 4/4 Angel with Vigilance, 4/4 Angel, and 3/3 Angel. Apart from the 3/3 they all have minor differences that make it extremely difficult to keep track of what kind of Angel you have and from where. The plain 4/4 Angel tokens are also extremely common to come by, so if you're representing your 4/4 Angel Warrior with Vigilance with one of those, then you might not notice the tribal synergies or the additional keyword.

A number of people have complained about the Angel token issue. I will pass along the note to the set design teams to think about how many versions exist at one time, but it’s not as easy to solve as it might appear at first blush. Because sets rotate, the only simple way to keep one Angel creature token in Standard is to lock into one thing and only ever make the Angel creature token that thing (say 4/4 flying) in new sets.What that means though is sets can’t adjust the token for the needs of that set. The Angel couldn’t gain Warrior to work with party, for example. The other fix is to just make more different kinds of tokens, the 3/3 flyer is a Gargoyle, the 4/4 with flying and vigilance is an Archon, for example, but then we get the Angel fans sad that we’re just making a lot less Angels. For people that care about this, would you prefer different creatures types if the stats/abilities are different?

Also Bo Levar (planeswalking smuggler/one of the titans) and Terrent Amese (created the cat warriors)

FYI (about Dominarian planeswalkers with last names)

My birthday was a couple of days ago and I wanted to ask if you have any trivia on gods dwarves or warriors? Thank you c:

Dwarves Warriors in Alpha was “Summon Dwarves”. We would later change “Summon” to “Creature” to make it clear it was a creature card. We then stopped using plurals in creature types. Finally, we changed the rules so that creatures could have more than one creature type and started doing race/class on humanoid creatures. Dwarven Warriors is now a “Creature - Dwarf Warrior”. Happy Belated Birthday!

Is it true dragons of tarkir will be about cat warriors?

Sit down. I have some bad news for you.

If you had unlimited space on the card for the Theros god's typelines, what would they have been? e.g. Would Mogis have ended up "Legendary Enchantment Creature - God Minotaur Warrior"?

I think we would follow our planeswalker example where when you get big enough, it overrides your race/class. Planeswalker Karn is not a golem and Ajani is not a cat.

Following cards from alpha are not modern legal and have no reserve list, color pie, complexity or power level concerns, think you could see if any can get fit into a set?: Dwarven Warriors, Hurloon Minotaur, Copper Tablet, Conservator, Burrowing, Celestial Prism, Castle, Animate Artifact, Ironclaw Orcs, Ironroot Treefolk, Lance, Living Wall, Obsianus Golem, Orcish Oriflamme, Pearled Unicorn, Plague Rats, Phantom Monster, Phantasmal Forces, Scavenging Ghoul

Interestingly, most of those cards we’ve made better versions of them.

Is making creatures with 2 power or less a red thing? The ability is in common (Goblin Tunneler and Dwarven Warriors) so maybe more support? Or does it already have a poor response? (The ability seems to work well for izzet decks as many blue creatures already have generally low power.) Sorry for the wall of text, it's just that Izzet is also my favorite guild so it would be a shame if the red half were weaker than the blue.

The Dwarven Warrior/Goblin Tunneler (power or 2 or less unblockable) is a red ability. The flavor is that it makes a tunnel which only small creatures can use.