Rewording Animate Artifact

6 posts / 0 new
Last post
Current Oracle Text: 


Enchant artifact

As long as enchanted artifact isn't a creature, it's an artifact creature with power and toughness each equal to its converted mana cost.

Suggested Oracle Text:
Enchant artifact
When Animate Artifact enters the battlefield, if enchanted artifact isn't a creature, it becomes a creature with power and toughness each equal to its converted mana cost.



Current Oracle Text: 


Enchant artifact

As long as enchanted artifact isn't a creature, it's an artifact creature with power and toughness each equal to its converted mana cost.

Suggested Oracle Text:
Enchant artifact
When Animate Artifact enters the battlefield, if enchanted artifact isn't a creature, it becomes a creature with power and toughness each equal to its converted mana cost.






This is a significant functional change.  Please explain the rationale behind your proposal.
The new oracle text confused me, and my suggested text seems truer to the spirit of the original card. 

My confusion stemmed from the new oracle text saying, 'as long as enchanted artifact isn't a creature, it's an artifact creature...' Whether or not this works in the rules of Magic (which I hesitate to believe,) it is counterintuitive to any number of players. Claiming that something is a creature as long as it isn't a creature just doesn't make sense.
Turning a non-creature permanent into a creature generally uses the verb 'becomes.' Turning the static ability (which is only relevant when cast) into a triggered ability upon entering the battlefield seems normal.
Admittedly, I forgot to include a clause that said, "When Animate Artifact leaves the battlefield, this effect ends."
Ultimately, I just don't understand how a static ability that presupposes that the object is not a creature could turn said object into a creature, and not be inherently contradictory.  
The new oracle text confused me, and my suggested text seems truer to the spirit of the original card. 

My confusion stemmed from the new oracle text saying, 'as long as enchanted artifact isn't a creature, it's an artifact creature...' Whether or not this works in the rules of Magic (which I hesitate to believe,) it is counterintuitive to any number of players. Claiming that something is a creature as long as it isn't a creature just doesn't make sense.
Turning a non-creature permanent into a creature generally uses the verb 'becomes.' Turning the static ability (which is only relevant when cast) into a triggered ability upon entering the battlefield seems normal.
Admittedly, I forgot to include a clause that said, "When Animate Artifact leaves the battlefield, this effect ends."
Ultimately, I just don't understand how a static ability that presupposes that the object is not a creature could turn said object into a creature, and not be inherently contradictory.  


At the time the static ability sarts applying (in the layering system), if the enchanted artifact is not a creature, it becomes one. This works just fine.
The version you propose is functionally different. WotC has a policy of keeping functionality.

Sig
Disclaimers
My initial responses to rules questions are usually just answers. If you want an explanation as to why, say so. Just because it says I'm there, I'm not necessarily there. I leave my browser open so I don't have to reload ~30 tabs. Anyone who wants to text duel me through either PM or chat can just PM me with a format (and a time if playing through chat). I don't play standard.
# Card Blind Hall of Fame
3CB
3CB #1 (1/30/11): Won by silasw, with Mishra's Factory, Orzhov Basilica, Vindicate. 3CB #2 (2/13/11): Won by Vektor480, with Mishra's Workshop, Ensnaring Bridge, Scalding Tongs 3CB #3(2/20/11): Joint win between defuse, with Saprazzan Skerry, Scalding Tongs, Energy Field; and Mown, with The Tabernacle at Pendrell Vale, Inkmoth Nexus, Sheltered Valley 3CB #4(3/13/11): Won by Mown, with Keldon Megaliths, The Tabernacle at Pendrell Vale, Boros Garrison 3CB #5(3/20/11): Won by silasw, with Black Lotus, Channel, Emrakul, the Aeons Torn
5CB
5CB 1 (3/6/11): Won by Maraxus-of-Keld, with Tropical Island, Thallid, Nether Spirit, Daze, Foil
quotes
56819178 wrote:
So, how would I use a card that has a large in the top half and "sui?l? -- pu?? ?is?q" across the middle?
57031358 wrote:
99113151 wrote:
Winning is not important if: 1. You win by a blowout. 2. You pay billions of dollars in cards to win. If you like wasting money just to win one game, while you could have saved it to lose a few and end up winning more in the future, then it is fine by me.
what? do you ceremonially light your deck on fire after a win?
57169958 wrote:
Or did no one notice Transmogrifying Licid before. (And by not notice, I mean covered their ears and shouted LA LA LA LA )
57193048 wrote:
57169958 wrote:
Hmmm... I think the most awkward situation at the moment is simply the Myr Welder / Equipment / Licid / Aura craziness, but I'm pretty sure he's aware of it.
If the most awkward thing going on right now involves Licids, I declare victory.
56287226 wrote:
We regret to inform you of Trevor Kidd's untimely demise in an unfortunate accident involving a mysteriously blown breaker box and a photophobic creature of unknown origin at his home near Renton, Washington. We at the Wizards Community apologize for any inconvenience or delay, and assure you we'll be preparing a replacement to assume his duties as soon as we finish warming up the cloning vats.
[02:47:46] It doesn't merely "come out of suspend" - you take the last time counter off, and then suspend triggers and say "now cast that! CAST IT NOOOOOW!" [02:47:49] Because suspend has no indoors voice
[10:11:33] !opalescence [10:11:33] Opalescence {2WW} |Enchantment| Each other non-Aura enchantment is a creature with power and toughness each equal to its converted mana cost. It's still an enchantment. · Reserved,UD-R,Vin,Leg,Cla,USBC [10:11:51] *sigh* [10:12:10] Otecko: Do you have a question about Opalescence? [10:12:17] sure [10:12:23] $10 on humility interaction [10:12:25] :P [10:12:29] :D [10:12:47] humility + opalescence put into play by replenish
Ego
58325628 wrote:
Mage is awesome, BTW.
56967858 wrote:
Dear Mage24365, You are totally awesome. Thank you so much. I hope you are able to dine in Paradise without kicking the bucket to actually get there, and that every dollar you ever make magically becomes two more.
58158398 wrote:
56761258 wrote:
I don't think there are any cards like that. There are things that prevent you from activating activated abilities, things that increase their cost, and things that counter them, but I don't think anything triggers from them specifically. There are things that trigger from targeting, so that might be relevant, but I can't think of anything that triggers from targeting a player. I'm almost positive there's nothing that triggers from damage being prevented.
Rings of Brighthearth; Dormant Gomazoa; Samite Ministration.
56761258 wrote:
Well played.

 

At the time the static ability sarts applying (in the layering system), if the enchanted artifact is not a creature, it becomes one. This works just fine.


It works fine according to the rules. The problem is that it doesn't work fine according to English. I understood it, but it is pretty awkward wording.

At the time the static ability sarts applying (in the layering system), if the enchanted artifact is not a creature, it becomes one. This works just fine.


It works fine according to the rules. The problem is that it doesn't work fine according to English. I understood it, but it is pretty awkward wording.




It works fine for English, it just depends on what logic you are using.
… and then, the squirrels came.
Sign In to post comments