Why do Several Cards in Aetherdrift have Redundant Wording?
General forum
Posted on Feb. 17, 2025, 5:40 p.m. by DemonDragonJ
I have noticed that two cards in Aetherdrift have redundant working: first, Coalstoke Gearhulk reanimates a creature with a finality counter, but also has the "exile at the beginning of the next end step" clause, which I thought that WotC was phasing out in favor of finality counters. Second, Aetherjacket sacrifices itself to activate its ability, but specifies "another target artifact" in its ability, which is not necessary, because it would not be on the battlefield to target itself, since sacrificing it is a requirement for activating the ability. Therefore, I find it to be very unusual that those two cards have such redundant wording.
What does everyone else say, about this? Why do several cards in Aetherdrift have redundant wording? I would be very interested to hear your thoughts, on this matter.
wallisface says... #3
It’s also worth noting, while we’re on a thread being pedantic about language, that ”several”, by definition, is more than two :)
February 17, 2025 8:35 p.m.
DemonDragonJ says... #4
wallisface, I am not certain if I fully comprehend your first point; would not the creature still be exiled by the clause, even if it did not have a finality counter on it?
February 17, 2025 9:14 p.m.
wallisface says... #5
DemonDragonJ the finality-counter clause makes sure the creature goes to exile if it would otherwise die before the end of turn. The final-clause is making sure it goes to exile if it survives until end of turn.
Without the finality-counter clause, you could sac the creature and get it back into the graveyard. without the final-clause, the creature would stick around for as many turns as you could keep it alive.
wallisface says... #2
Neither if these texts are redundant.
In the case of Coalstoke Gearhulk, there’s obviously no redundancy. The reanimated creature exists until the end of turn, and thereafter goes to exile. Both those clauses are required to make that happen. I’m not sure how you could see any part of that text as being redundant.
In the case of Aetherjacket, and with all activated abilities in magic, targets are chosen before paying costs. Without the ”another” text, it could target itself and have the ability fizzle. But in any case, being able to sac itself for no material benefit is probably something wotc didn’t want to so-easily allow, particularly with how easily artifact-combos can get out of control. While the clause to target itself is narrow, we’ve seen KCI combo-decks doing more absurd things already.
February 17, 2025 8:33 p.m.