I find it really strange that I haven’t already written an article like this. I mean, of course I have mentioned the card before in high terms. It is even at the very top of my list of favorite cards to play. But this card merits its own article. And recent events (that I will get back to) have made it ever more relevant for me to get this piece out there now.
Yeah, I am talking about Copy Artifact.
Why?
Because it is one banger of a card. As I have mentioned in the above-linked article, I think it is one of those cards that should be included in basically any deck capable of producing blue mana. At least as a one-of. I admit that space can be tight in the relevant lists in our format (Old School), but I just think the upside of the card is so strong – and the downside basically non-existing – that it should always be considered and most of the time played.
Why include Copy Artifact?
Because even a two-mana Mox is still worth it. You all play that Fellwar Stone anyway. Yes, I know that Fellwar Stone and Copy Artifact are two very different cards, and yes I acknowledge that with a Fellwar Stone you are around 99% certain to be able to always make a mana rock for two generic mana. But the additional upside to Copy Artifact is just so overwhelming.
Even if neither you nor your opponent has a Mox in play (which is, by the way, one of the weaker targets for Copy Artifact most of the time), in most games of Old School Magic you will have a plethora of other relevant targets! The versatility of the card is, plainly speaking, out of any scale of Old School cards.
Copy Artifact can be a creature, a land, a draw engine, removal, life gain, direct damage and so much more. No other cards in our format (maybe in the entire game) has this versatility fastened to it. The only thing coming close to Copy Artifact in versatility may be Fork, but that is a lot more situational.
And yes, the versatility of Copy Artifact is of course also somewhat situational, because you have to have a target of some kind. But you don’t really have to sacrifice anything to build a deck that has relevant targets. Actually, unless you are playing Red/Green beats or something along those lines, you would be hard pressed to NOT include a lot of very relevant targets in your deck. Power, Sol Ring, Chaos Orb and Mishra’s Factories for starters.
So, why isn’t it played more?
Good question. Of course, it is not that Copy Artifact doesn’t see play. It is played a lot, but very often it is played as a two-of or a complete playset to copy Su-Chis and Triskelions in the robot decks around.
I think it is interesting that we don’t see more one-ofs. As mentioned above, I am willing to die on the hill, that most decks should play at least one copy. I think it would be interesting to see what would happen with the inclusion of Copy Artifacts in the population of decks, if the card got restricted.
This is not an article about restricting or unrestricting anything, and even if it was, I would never suggest that Copy Artifact should be restricted. But I actually think that more people would consider including it in their 60, if the card was restricted.
It is, of course, a claim I can never substantiate nor test, but I have a feeling that the simple fact that a card is restricted is enough to make it appear more on people’s radars. The logic behind this thinking is that seeing as someone has seen it fit to restrict a card, it must be at the very top of the list of strong bangers.
Anyway. A thesis almost impossible to test, without actually restricting it. And I don’t think it would be enough to try a tournament with just restricting Copy Artifact. It would not be enough of a sample. And I don’t think you can use Alpha40, where Copy Artifact is restricted, as a measuring stick for anything because the cards are so extremely, prohibitively expensive, that the format and the cards played are just “strange”.
But why should you include a one-of Copy Artifact in your deck? Good question. Let us try to look a bit more into it.
Is the first copy of Copy Artifact better than an off-color Mox?
No. Basically never, unless you are playing some kind of Enchantress deck, where an extra Enchantment with great versatility may be exactly what you need instead of that Mox Pearl…
Is it better than the fourth Tome?
Almost assuredly not. At least in most cases. I know that some The Deck players are taking a step back from the full set of Jayemdae Tomes, but should they include a Copy Artifact instead? Often, they don’t. There are just so many strong cards available to them, that Copy may not be at the top. But I would still argue that it should be at least a consideration.
Is the first copy of Copy Artifact better than the fourth copy of Ankh of Mishra then?
I’d say yes very often. If you play Ankh, you are probably also playing Black Vise and a lot of Moxen. You may even enjoy a Mishra’s Factory here or there. And the fourth Ankh of Mishra is often a bit of overkill.
What about Fellwar Stones, then?
Well, I really don’t like Fellwar Stone. On the other hand, I really do like Copy Artifact. And this may be the centre of my point about always playing at least one copy. I just think that it is almost always going to be better than the first Fellwar Stone. Of course it depends somewhat on the other 59 cards in your deck. But if you are considering adding Fellwar Stone, I’d argue that you should stop and think very hard, if Copy Artifact wouldn’t be a better include. And if you are thinking about adding the second Fellwar Stone, just drop the idea, and sleeve up that Copy Artifact instead.
But what about robots, then. Is the first Copy Artifact really better than the fourth Su-Chi or the fourth Triskelion. Well, no, of course not. If you are playing robots, play robots! But this may also be quite the moot point, because most robot decks will already field at least two Copy artifacts (but really should play four, always!).
But what about other cards then? Yes, exactly. I am not sure the first Copy Artifact necessarily needs to be considered instead of another artifact. Actually to the contrary. It makes sense that Copy Artifact gets better the more artifacts you play, so swapping out artifacts for Copy Artifact may not be the best idea. But what then?
Well, basically I would argue that you can swap out a lot of things for the first copy of Copy Artifact in your starting 60. The whole point is that Copy Artifact is one of the most flexible cards in the format, which means it is capable of playing more or less the role you set it up to.
A taste of my own medicine
If anything I am the choir that has been preached to (by myself). So of course, I am playing Copy Artifact in most of my decks. Often, really, as a four-of. But lately I haven’t really found my Unlimited playset to quite hit the sweet spot. I mean they have been doing great Trisk and Factory impressions – they have even been tapping for three colorless in their best Mana Vault impressions, only to be swapped right back into my hand with a Hurkyl’s recall. Yeah, they have done work.
But they are just so… Whitebordered. And they don’t quite match my Verduran Enchantress nor my Animate Dead – two cards I very often play my Copy Artifacts alongside of.
And then, the other day, I was scrolling through Magic Card Market and stumbled upon a really cool copy of the card. Very rare too. And, strangely, the guy why had it on sale lived around 45 minutes away from me! What are the odds?!
Well, anyway. The short of it really is this:
Yeah. Now I have an Alpha Copy Artifact. That is another decision, I have not regretted, and probably never will.
Will I ever complete the playset? Probably not. This is the second-most expensive card I have ever bought (only next to my Unlimited Lotus back in 2017 when prices were somewhat different). Maybe I will have one Alpha and three Beta copies in time. Maybe one Alpha and three Unlimited forever. Who knows? Normally, I buy complete playsets of cards, if in any way possible. That was not the case this time. I’ll manage.
There is this strange thing about buying Alpha cards: they are all always grails. I will never upgrade this card, simply because it is not possible (yes, I know some of you find altered, signed, Summer or other to be more rare or whatever, I don’t). This card will be added to the pile, I can already say will probably be part of my kids’ inheritance at some point down the line. Strange feeling. Makes it a lot easier to never regret buying it.
Such a privilege!
No Responses