Damn, lost my text in an accidental refresh. the sources were Takkkkkklemaggggoot (or however it's spelt) and some mythic goblin lord that turned every goblin into a spikeshot when it attacked. I complained about the maggot's stupid long wording then made one of my own.

Much less words than the Taki-Mago, though, so I automatically reward you with the medal of achievement in design. Now you must attack, if able.

"its controller may return Bloodlust (not the legends one) to the battlefield attached to target creature."

Meh, templating can bite me. Intent is clear.

Intent isn't enough. Templating (at this level) makes a difference to rules consequences. Should this re-trigger Confusion in the Ranks? The two possible wordings of this (Shiny Umbreon's one or "If enchanted creature would die, its controller may attach ~ to another creature, then that creature dies" or something along those lines) have rather different rules implications.

Having argued that templating matters and intent isn't enough: it doesn't have to be the same person. Somebody needs to worry about templating before a card makes it to print, but it's fine if you don't want to be that person, though.

As far as this card cares, though; either choice is fine.