Were Clue tokens inspired by the Ravnica Cluestones?

No. We were trying to figure out how to draw half a card.

I don't see why people like food tokens so much. Treasure is obviously very good, maybe too good when done in large amounts, clue tokens seem balanced even in large amounts, food is too weak to be viable yet people love it. Can you explain why designers and some people seem to like food tokens so much? Thanks

1. Food isn’t inherently “too weak”
2. Life gain is popular
3. Food, as a flavor, is popular

Bonsoir, Mark! When new keyword mechanics are made, we sometimes see old cards with identical text errata'd to have the keyword (like Surveil, recently). Is the reverse possible? For example, could Investigate on old cards be replaced with "Create a Clue token" if the designers felt it was the best approach?

I think we’re going to continue with investigate for creating Clue tokens.

Since "investigate" exists as shorthand for "create a Clue token", do you think we could get "cook" to replace "create a Food token"?

We consider tying token to a keyword action a mistake, and thus, stopped doing it for later tokens.

Can I get a yes on Murder at Karlov Manor featuring the return of Investigate and Clue tokens? (I know you need to keep things vague but c’mon how does it not?)

Maybe. : )

Is it too late to divorce clue creation from investigate, or is that a change you might make for consistencies sake?

We’re allowed to do it if it feels right for a set. We don’t have to investigate to make Clue tokens.

Hey Mark! I was just constructing a food deck and I got to wondering: is there a reason you guys chose to make them artifacts? The same question sort of applies to blood and clue tokens as well: while treasures are certainly artifacts, most other consumable tokens require some mental leaps to apply that type. Clues are abstract and could be anything, blood is less of an artifact than the vial it's stored in, and I think if I described anyone's food as an "artifact" I would be promptly asked to leave. To be clear, I love how the tokens play and they've done wonders for artifact synergy decks. I'm just curious about the dubious *flavor* of food as artifacts. Was it mostly a logistics issue that prevented you guys from making a new card type like "consumable" or something? Should I just mentally translate the word "artifact" into something more generic like "item" in mtg contexts?

Of the card types, artifact is the only one that represents nonliving tangible objects, so things that are tangible things but not alive are labeled artifacts.

The new set looks really interesting so far. I have to ask though, with the detective/ sleuth cards that have been so far was investigate/ clue tokens considered at all? It feels like a very natural fit

There are not a lot of detective/sleuth cards.

Flavorfully shouldn't you sac a clue to investigate? How likely would you say a card that makes clue tokens without investigate?

You investigate and find a clue. One day, we might make Clue tokens without investigating.

Why don't Clue tokens need to be tapped unlike Treasure and Food tokens?

They were made first and we didn’t have as much experience with artifact tokens.