[SCD] Precursor Golem

[KeiDot]

http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=110589&d=1284437147

Precursor Golem  
Artifact Creature - Golem, 3/3

When ~ comes into play, put two 3/3 colorless Golem artifact creature tokens into play.
Whenever a player casts an instant or sorcery spell that targets only a single Golem, that player copies that spell for each other Golem that spell could target. Each copy targets a different one of those Golems.

Seems good, not as busted as I thought. Wasn't thinking about the wording on Tinker when I read Golem so eggs on my face.

[LotusHead]

So while this is in play, anyone can cast Instants or Sorceries on ANY Golem and all golems get targeted? Even my Lodestone Golems?

Sounds dangerous, but makes for a fun berzerk/fling deck!

[beder]

5 mana for a "pseudo" 9/9!  Well, this thing is really really brutal.

Not even talking about the synergie with tangle wire, smokestack, welder or even the new "thinkering" artifact...

And it has a "partial" protection against trygon or quasali... Well, this is not bad at all!

[Bibendum]

its not bad until a natures claim kills this, both tokens and your karn/lodestone. Sure you gain a bunch of life but does it matter if they just slowly vault key for the win.

[beder]

its not bad until a natures claim kills this, both tokens and your karn/lodestone. Sure you gain a bunch of life but does it matter if they just slowly vault key for the win.

Well, if you are in a position where you could have on board both karn/lodestone and this new creature, it means that you are already in a pretty good situation. Most of the time, you don't even need to put a another golem on board, won't really change the game state in terms of clock. I don't feel like this particular situation will often occur.

And when it comes to nature's claim "just on this new golem", my point of view is that nature's claim would also have killed the other artifact you could have played (in place of this new golem). The only difference being that you win 12 life instead of 4.

Remark : there could be a nice synergie with "Reckless charge" in a "red shop" build (with welder and bazaar for instance)
Sorcery  
Target creature gets +3/+0 and gains haste until end of turn
Flashback

[BruiZar]

The art is great. I think it would be nice with Transmute Artifact to tinker up vault key and Memory Jar or something. The dangerous aspect appeals to me, but you have to sideboard this thing out once the hate comes in Does Energy Tap give you 5 or  15 mana from this thing?

[Troy_Costisick]

Guys, when cards reference themselves they shorten their names.  Someone nature's claiming one of the tokens does not get to nature's claim your Lodestone.  If they did, it would say "all other golems you control."

[Guli]

Another interesting effect. They sure tried to be creative this time.

[LotusHead]

When ~ comes into play, put two 3/3 colorless Golem artifact creature tokens into play.
Whenever a player casts an instant or sorcery spell that targets only a single Golem, that player copies that spell for each other Golem that spell could target. Each copy targets a different one of those Golems.

I think the wording says that any golem that gets targeted makes all golems get targeted, unless it's not just a "single" Golem.  So Fire/Ice on Fire doing 1 damage each to my Lodestone Golem and your Karn, Silver Golem would do nothing more than those two single points of damage, but Fire for 2 on my Lodestone Golem would be Fire for 2 to all Golems in play.

Wizards has gone out of it's way to not shorten names in the last few (5ish?) years, but there may be exceptions.  I don't think this is one of them.

[madmanmike25]

WOW!  This card is beastly in the MUD mirror.  What instants and sorceries???  3 permanents for 5 mana netting 9 dmg.  Each can trade with a Lodestone/Jugg.  For those who play Sculpting Steel this is pretty sick if copied.

Then you have the other matchups.  If you had one 9/9 that got claimed/bounced it would be the same effect pretty much since it kills them all so it's not that much of a drawback.  The potential to do nine damage for five mana is pretty damn good.  Two swings for 18 life is pretty much game.  The synergy with Forgemaster is obvious.

I'm willing to bet that this would target all golems, seems just too good otherwise. 

[TopSecret]

With or without the possible Nature's Claim shenanigans on all possible Golems in play (not sure if this works or not),
this card is now pretty much the best artifact creature card to cast at five mana in the majority of situations.

Forgemaster is good and may see play in the same deck as this card (which would be pretty neat),
but if a workshop deck has to choose between the two for the five mana slot, I think this wins most of the time.
Especially since it ignores Null Rod.

[FlyFlySideOfFry]

R.I.P Juggernaut

[Delha]

Guys, when cards reference themselves they shorten their names.  Someone nature's claiming one of the tokens does not get to nature's claim your Lodestone.  If they did, it would say "all other golems you control."

I'm afraid you are mistaken. For a start, the two tokens are not copies of Precursor Golem, they are simply Golem tokens. By the logic you're using, targeting the original copies the spell to all other Precursor Golem cards in play, but never affects the tokens. that seems silly.

Also, if you look at Coralhelm Commander as an example of recent templating, creature subtypes are indeed capitalized.

[Troy_Costisick]

Guys, when cards reference themselves they shorten their names.  Someone nature's claiming one of the tokens does not get to nature's claim your Lodestone.  If they did, it would say "all other golems you control."

I'm afraid you are mistaken. For a start, the two tokens are not copies of Precursor Golem, they are simply Golem tokens. By the logic you're using, targeting the original copies the spell to all other Precursor Golem cards in play, but never affects the tokens. that seems silly.

Also, if you look at Coralhelm Commander as an example of recent templating, creature subtypes are indeed capitalized.

Yeah, I think you're right.  Too much Nature's Claim, Lightning Bolt, and Ancient Grudge out there to make me want to play this card in a MUD shell.

[serracollector]

If I sacced a token to Transmute artifact, paying say, 4 mana to find w/e, does each other golem in play get sacced to find an artifact with CC 4 or less, or would you have to pay the mana for each transmute effect?  If not then a 5 tinker deck with 4 of these sounds like a very common turn 2-3 win?

[Guli]

Sacrificing the creature is just part of the spell. It is not targeted.

Thing is the disadvantage can also be presented as an advantage, in that I follow your comment. For example giant growth on 1 golem would make things fat.

[TAF]

Guys, when cards reference themselves they shorten their names.  Someone nature's claiming one of the tokens does not get to nature's claim your Lodestone.  If they did, it would say "all other golems you control."

I'm afraid you are mistaken. For a start, the two tokens are not copies of Precursor Golem, they are simply Golem tokens. By the logic you're using, targeting the original copies the spell to all other Precursor Golem cards in play, but never affects the tokens. that seems silly.

Also, if you look at Coralhelm Commander as an example of recent templating, creature subtypes are indeed capitalized.

Yes, but Coralhelm Commander reads "Merfolk creatures." Precursor Golem just reads "Golems." It is not referencing the creature type; it is referencing the created tokens. You get to keep your 3/3 for 5 if one of the tokens are targeted.

Edit: Think of it in the way you would with Maelstrom Pulse targeting, well, anything. Anything with that same exact name will die. If you target a Golem (the created token) with a Doomblade, all of those Golems will die, but not your Precursor Golem.

[Stormanimagus]

Sacrificing the creature is just part of the spell. It is not targeted.

Thing is the disadvantage can also be presented as an advantage, in that I follow your comment. For example giant growth on 1 golem would make things fat.

Yeah, that's a damn shame. Otherwise I'd say that Shrapnel Blast would make this a powerhouse. Mono-Red Combo deck?

[Stormanimagus]

Guys, when cards reference themselves they shorten their names.  Someone nature's claiming one of the tokens does not get to nature's claim your Lodestone.  If they did, it would say "all other golems you control."

I'm afraid you are mistaken. For a start, the two tokens are not copies of Precursor Golem, they are simply Golem tokens. By the logic you're using, targeting the original copies the spell to all other Precursor Golem cards in play, but never affects the tokens. that seems silly.

Also, if you look at Coralhelm Commander as an example of recent templating, creature subtypes are indeed capitalized.

Ah, this is wrong. A Golem is a creature type and doesn't care if it attached to a card or a token. if someone targets ANY of your Golems (token or non-token) with a spell that spell will be copied and for each Golem in play and target them. This is a pretty simple concept people.

-Storm
Yes, but Coralhelm Commander reads "Merfolk creatures." Precursor Golem just reads "Golems." It is not referencing the creature type; it is referencing the created tokens. You get to keep your 3/3 for 5 if one of the tokens are targeted.

Edit: Think of it in the way you would with Maelstrom Pulse targeting, well, anything. Anything with that same exact name will die. If you target a Golem (the created token) with a Doomblade, all of those Golems will die, but not your Precursor Golem.

[TAF]

Ah, this is wrong. A Golem is a creature type and doesn't care if it attached to a card or a token. if someone targets ANY of your Golems (token or non-token) with a spell that spell will be copied and for each Golem in play and target them. This is a pretty simple concept people.

-Storm

The templating for this is different, as there has never been any precedence for referencing a creature type without using the word creature in the templating. This makes it a confusing concept. For example, look at every lord ever created, then look at Precursor Golem. Precursor Golem has created an Artifact Creature -- Golem named Golem. It has a name for targeting purposes. (Think killing a Plant token created by Avenger of Zendikar with Maelstrom Pulse.) If the effect of Precursor Golem killed all Golem creatures, it would say that, but it does not. And if that is the intent, Wizards is changing their card text, and that is confusing.

[FTKzak]

Keep in mind that creature types don't show up solely on creatures anymore...it's quite possible that they left the card type open-ended on purpose. It's not too far-fetched for them to create a "Tribal Enchantment - Golem" card.

[TAF]

Keep in mind that creature types don't show up solely on creatures anymore...it's quite possible that they left the card type open-ended on purpose. It's not too far-fetched for them to create a "Tribal Enchantment - Golem" card.

Okay. I looked at Cloudgoat Ranger and this makes sense. Point proven.

All our Karns are in trouble... 

[Delha]

Thing is the disadvantage can also be presented as an advantage, in that I follow your comment. For example giant growth on 1 golem would make things fat.

I was leaning towards Invigorate, personally. Man do I love finding ways to break that card.

If I sacced a token to Transmute artifact, paying say, 4 mana to find w/e, does each other golem in play get sacced to find an artifact with CC 4 or less, or would you have to pay the mana for each transmute effect?  If not then a 5 tinker deck with 4 of these sounds like a very common turn 2-3 win?

While your idea doesn't work, Polymorph on this guy could certainly have hilarious results. Assuming you run nothing buy Lodestones and this dude, your odds of NOT having 20+ power on the board are rather low.

Yeah, that's a damn shame. Otherwise I'd say that Shrapnel Blast would make this a powerhouse. Mono-Red Combo deck?

Soul's Fire perhaps? Doesn't even eat your dude. Reckless Charge gets really ugly too.

[Anusien]

Guys, when cards reference themselves they shorten their names.  Someone nature's claiming one of the tokens does not get to nature's claim your Lodestone.  If they did, it would say "all other golems you control."

Incorrect. Only legends with lots of text shorten their name. It would only care about golems you control if this was only intended to affect golems you control.

The templating for this is different, as there has never been any precedence for referencing a creature type without using the word creature in the templating. This makes it a confusing concept. For example, look at every lord ever created, then look at Precursor Golem. Precursor Golem has created an Artifact Creature -- Golem named Golem. It has a name for targeting purposes. (Think killing a Plant token created by Avenger of Zendikar with Maelstrom Pulse.) If the effect of Precursor Golem killed all Golem creatures, it would say that, but it does not. And if that is the intent, Wizards is changing their card text, and that is confusing.

This is totally incorrect. When Lorwyn/Morningtide introduced Tribal, it meant things with creature subtypes were not creatures, and things that cared only about creatures (like pump) specified. Other cards do not. When something doesn't care about creatures and wants to affect all permanents, it uses just the tribe.

Crystalline Sliver {WU} |Creature -- Sliver| 2/2. All Slivers have shroud.

Thus any spells that target this would also target any other Golem Permanents, including any Tribal Enchantment - Golem or Tribal Artifact - Golems that would later be printed, as well as an enchantment turned into a creature with Opalescence and granted the Golem creature type by Imagecrafter.

[limitedwhole]

This card is pretty good as a sideboard card against MUD in a classic control style deck.  It effectively kills there next 3 golems and they have no instants or sorceries to copy. 

[Delha]

This card is pretty good as a sideboard card against MUD in a classic control style deck.  It effectively kills there next 3 golems and they have no instants or sorceries to copy.

I was going to disagree strongly, but then it occurred to me that it dodges both Thorn and Lodestone. It might be viable. I'm still dubious about whether you'll be able to get 5 free mana though. Wires, Wastes, Spheres... There's still plenty that sets you back.

[Troy_Costisick]

This card is pretty good as a sideboard card against MUD in a classic control style deck.  It effectively kills there next 3 golems and they have no instants or sorceries to copy.

I was going to disagree strongly, but then it occurred to me that it dodges both Thorn and Lodestone. It might be viable. I'm still dubious about whether you'll be able to get 5 free mana though. Wires, Wastes, Spheres... There's still plenty that sets you back.

Don't forget that it's basically unaffected by Trinisphere too.  Doesn't mean Resistors, Wires, Wastes, and Smokestack won't make a difference like you say.  But hey, that's 9 cards it gets through.  Not bad.

[limitedwhole]

This card is pretty good as a sideboard card against MUD in a classic control style deck.  It effectively kills there next 3 golems and they have no instants or sorceries to copy. 

Scratch that it can kill allot more than their next 3.  It can kill all their golems.

[desolutionist]

This would be really good with

[Troy_Costisick]

This card is pretty good as a sideboard card against MUD in a classic control style deck.  It effectively kills there next 3 golems and they have no instants or sorceries to copy. 

Scratch that it can kill allot more than their next 3.  It can kill all their golems.

Whoa, you're right.  If affects all golems, not just your own.  That's a little different from what we've seen lately.  Maybe it *does* just reference the tokens.