Is this meant to refer to creatures with union in some way? Maybe say "Creatures with union are Flagbearers in addition to their other types"?

Nope, strictly used for giving Union to other creatures.

All union does is give creatures union? That doesn't seem like much of a mechanic.

Well, the mechanics page shows that the other creatures with the ability do something with it.

Personally I think it'd be better to have this do something. I mean, Diregraf Escort is primarily only useful for giving Joint Assault something to do and for turning on Flowering Lumberknot, but it does do something without those specialised cards. I think this should be the same.

When I first read this, I expected it to say "must choose at least one creature with Union on the battlefield if able." Having the Union on this do absolutely nothing is a mistake, as those above have pointed out.

­Bloodied Ghost created quite a stir for doing, roughly, what Rally Marshal does. It has supporters and detractors, but I think the main reason that Bloodied Ghost still works is because it is so direct. It comes on the battlefield, gets a -1/-1 counter and asks you to figure out how to use it. Rally Marshall, on the other hand, enters the battlefield, triggers Union, then talks about Flagbearers. People will automatically assume that the Union and the Flagbearers have to do something with each other, and when they find out they are wrong, they will be unhappy. It's kind of silly, but it's human nature... we prefer the flow of slowly getting something, not being told that we have to back up and look at something different way.

I don't think you have to remove the broken Union on this card, but I highly suggest removing the Flagbearer ability. I think a 'broken' Union card by itself is plenty interesting for common.

Well I was going to change this but I've convinced myself otherwise. The reasoning behind this card was partially for flavor. Having a creature that rallies people to the cause and then draws fire away from the main force was the basic gist. Now in regards to Link's comment, reading is tech. The Flagbearer ability might be a little confusing since Union appears on the card, but it doesn't do nothing as far as the Union ability is concerned; again, reading is tech.

"Reading is tech" is not a good argument against "People will misunderstand and misplay this". If you're fighting human nature, you're going to lose.

Being condescending doesn't allow you to get away with bad design.

I apologize for the attitude, I'm running on no sleep right now(long story).

Anyway, you're probably right about the card having "misplay" opportunities; I'm just wanting to have a fake hexproof effect for Union and Flagbearers were something I personally believe WotC could have done something with.

As for what I think I was trying to say before, I noticed that the way Union was worded that it doesn't go away when the creature granting it leaves play. So while this technically does something with Union, I can see why people would think it does nothing.

I guess my comment would be "Way too confusing for common"

Just the flag bearer is probably too complex for common, but I might be persuadable.

Granting union (without a token to represent it or anything) without that union doing anything? Also too complex, but I might be persuaded. And without at least some examples of what union is FOR, very hard to support.

Both? WAY too complex, even if lots of other things affect union in a single simple way.

Flagbearers were common originally: Standard Bearer and Coalition Honor Guard. They had about 10 rewordings via errata to try to make them work within the rules. They were definitely the most confusing of the non-keyword abilities in Apocalypse. Combining it with soulbond, the most confusing of the common abilities from Avacyn Restored (because miracle wasn't at common), is pushing the boundaries for common, but plausible if it's got a good flow to it, if the flavour and mechanics work naturally.

Which, unfortunately, this has the precise opposite of: it has the most confusing version of Union (compare with Persuasive Conscription and Harran Blitzer, which make a lot more sense).

If you switched the rarity of this and Harran Blitzer, it miiiight be alright. It'd certainly be better.

I guess I should add that there are several things about Union that are great. The way that each card with it provides two permanents with union is nice for increasing the board impact. The way it goes if both you and your opponent have some union cards is fantastic - reminiscent of Sliver mirror matches, but more interesting. The mechanic as demonstrated on Harran Blitzer is very natural and easy to grok - like a simpler version of soulbond.

It's just this one card's approach to it that's so confusing.